1080ti on Freesync monitor

Discussion in 'nVidia Flavor' started by Ziontrain, Jul 27, 2017.

  1. Ziontrain

    Ziontrain [H]ardly Working

    Messages:
    2,134
    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    After watching the Vega/1080ti blind test, it had me thinking..

    Has anyone had an top end nvidia card, THEN switched to a gsync monitor? Was there a noticable difference and is it worth the extra money to upgrade?

    If I am getting 100+ fps in games will it really make that much of a difference getting a G-sync monitor?

    Or the other route..getting an AMD RX Vega so I can benefit from Freesync?
     
  2. Armenius

    Armenius [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    11,849
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    I had a VG278HE when I upgraded to a GTX Titan X. I later purchased my PG278Q that same year. Yes, the difference was very noticeable going from a static refresh rate monitor to a dynamic one. I articulated very often that after getting G-Sync I don't really care about FPS anymore unless it's obvious my PC is struggling at any given settings. I just set all settings to the max and off I go.

    You will still get tearing and judder if you're not matched exactly to your monitor's refresh rate. G-Sync eliminates both issues.

    Since you already have a 1080 Ti according to your signature it is definitely not worth a downgrade in performance just to be able to use Freesync.
     
    CSI_PC and Ziontrain like this.
  3. Ziontrain

    Ziontrain [H]ardly Working

    Messages:
    2,134
    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Thanks for your input, Armenius.

    I forgot to mention I have not played on a rig that had Freesync or G-sync monitor of any kind. There are some vids on youtube that try and show the difference, but I can't tell that much. It seems more like a "you have to try it to get it" feature.

    I had 2x 970's at the time I purchased the monitor. I bought it from Amazon at less than $300 (used, but turned out to be brand new), so I couldn't pass it up. I would've loved for it to be Gsync, but I am very happy with my current setup.

    I am just getting the upgrade bug again, but I think I will wait until a 30" 4k 100hz+ HDR monitor is available before I upgrade again.
     
  4. Armenius

    Armenius [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    11,849
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    It really is something you have to experience firsthand to understand its impact. I still think adaptive refresh technology is the most significant change to come in the gaming landscape for years, and I would never go back to static refresh rate. And then there are others whose reaction is... less than enthusiastic. I'm still trying to figure out if I can squeeze a PG27UQ into my budget when that gets released.
     
    Ziontrain and Kwaz like this.
  5. NukeDukem

    NukeDukem [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    2,028
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    I notice right away when G-sync breaks on my monitor. In NS2, sometimes if I Alt-Tab out of the game and return, "Fullscreen" mode is disabled and G-sync along with it. I notice this in-game immediately. The "smoothness" is completely gone without G-sync enabled, even at the max refresh rate!
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2017
    Armenius and Ziontrain like this.
  6. AlphaQup

    AlphaQup [H]Lite

    Messages:
    112
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2014
    I currently use a EVGA 1080 + Dell S2716DG and I can immediately tell the difference between when G-Sync running and when it's not (usually due to first time launching a game or something), but the difference is glaringly obvious.

    You really do need to see the difference first-hand, there's no way (that I've seen, I'm sure others agree) to accurately convey the smoothness via video or anything like that.

    When I first purchased mine, all I had to go off of was others opinions of it, I had 0 in person experience with it before I pulled the trigger.

    Once you're used to G-Sync, there's no going back, definitely one of the greatest innovations to come to PC gaming in a long time, completely agree with Armenius on this.

    If you're the kind of person that absolutely has to have buttery smooth performance (IMO, lack of smoothness is very immersion-breaking) then it's a no-brainer, pick up one of these displays.

    If you're not the kind of person that's sensitive to it, the wow-factor won't be nearly as great as I just talked it up to be, lol.
     
    MorgothPl, Armenius and Ziontrain like this.
  7. Kwaz

    Kwaz Whine & Cheezy

    Messages:
    2,405
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2014
    Totally agree. I got a 980 Ti, then a 165hz gsync monitor and it's awesome.

    I'll add that if and when you do this you'll want to set the VSYNC mode to fast.
     
    Armenius likes this.
  8. Lmah2x

    Lmah2x Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    481
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2014
    I would choose a 60hz G-Sync display over a 240hz non-Gsync display. That's how important it is to me. Luckily we have better options than that.
    You need to experience it though to appreciate it. I've had a PG278Q and a X34 Predator, next up is probably whoever releases 4k 144hz G-Sync first.
     
    Armenius likes this.
  9. Ziontrain

    Ziontrain [H]ardly Working

    Messages:
    2,134
    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Wow..THAT is a strong statement. I was impressed how much 60hz vs 144hz made. Thanks for your input. I'm also going to wait for the 4k/144hz/G-Sync.

    I wish Nvidia would just support Freesync as well, but I understand why they don't. They make money on both ends. Whoever buys an Nvidia card wants a G-Sync monitor, and whoever gets a G-Sync monitor wants an Nvidia card.
     
  10. Kwaz

    Kwaz Whine & Cheezy

    Messages:
    2,405
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2014
    It's a different technology that does more more better. They do a similar thing.

    Nvidia went and fixed the problem. AMD's solution is more of a patch job that works well under 'certain circumstances'.
     
  11. Odellus

    Odellus [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,696
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    ok, gsync is great, but that's just ridiculous.
     
  12. Archaea

    Archaea [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,316
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Um. No.

    Don't be silly

    There is a blind test on the front page of this site right now with 10 people - the majority of which say it's impossible to tell, and a slight majority prefered the freesync over the ones that preferred the gsync.

    In my estimation they do they same thing. Freesync is cheaper.

    I just swapped out two Fury X for a pair of 1080ti.

    I hosted a LAN party today and really truly missed the smoothness of freesync. I'll probably sell the 1080ti and move back to Vega when they come out. I'm seeing microstutter and 60hz seems choppy now compared to the freesync @75hz I've used for about the last year. Monitors are HP Omen 32.
     
  13. Kwaz

    Kwaz Whine & Cheezy

    Messages:
    2,405
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2014
    Yep I read that article. Just because you personally can't tell the difference, doesn't mean that I can't. Keep in mind that the article was based on one game with engineering samples.

    AMD didn't, and to some degree still doesn't, have the horsepower to run a display where I wanted it. 2k at 165hz with sync.

    Hate to break it to you, but that micro stutter is SLI. Not the sync technology. Historically crossfire has had better implementation than SLI.
     
  14. LigTasm

    LigTasm [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,922
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    I've used both extensively. Freesync is very very good, although I think Gsync is much better at dealing with (very) low frame rates due to the simple fact of the extra hardware. However, I find that Freesync is abysmal is some older games that I play, for example my #1 most played game is World of Tanks - Gsync works great but Freesync causes massive flickering that would send an epileptic to the hospital. If its a AAA title chances are Freesync works comparably, but being a driver based solution they have to work every title in there and anything that isn't a headline title isn't going to see their efforts.
     
    kalston, Armenius and Kwaz like this.
  15. Kwaz

    Kwaz Whine & Cheezy

    Messages:
    2,405
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2014
    Absolutely. Freesync is good. But GSYNC is better from my experience and understanding of the technology.

    Freesync doesn't have very much range either. It can't scale like GSYNC can from zilch FPS and beyond. If I remember correctly Freesync can only do 30 to 100 FPS or something like that.
     
  16. Archaea

    Archaea [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,316
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Kwaz, what freesync setup have you used?
     
  17. Kwaz

    Kwaz Whine & Cheezy

    Messages:
    2,405
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2014
    I don't remember the specific model numbers.
     
  18. LigTasm

    LigTasm [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,922
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    I'm not sure what hes used but I've used about a dozen adaptive sync monitors now. These are the ones I can recall off the top of my head - I've run the gamut from high refresh 1080p all the way to 4k and ultrawide. TN, VA, IPS. I'm looking to pull the trigger on a 240hz Gsync panel now.

    Freesync:

    BenQ XL2730Z
    Samsung U28E590
    Viewsonic XG2401
    Samsung CFG70
    Acer XR342CK
    Asus MG279Q

    Gsync:
    BenQ XL2420G
    Dell S2716DG
    Dell S2417DG
    Asus PG278Q
    Multiple G-sync laptops
     
    Kwaz likes this.
  19. -Strelok-

    -Strelok- [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    11,053
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2010
    The way I see it is I would rather be stuck with Nvidia than AMD. It’s been 2+ years since AMD even put up a fight in the high end.

    That said I’m gonna wait a bit longer. $1000 for a 4K monitor with gsync isn’t worth it IMO.
     
  20. Algrim

    Algrim Gawd

    Messages:
    965
    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2016
    I don't want to be locked to either ecosystem but if I had to choose one over the other I'd take FreeSync simply because there's no additional cost involved (at least until FreeSync 2).
     
  21. Kwaz

    Kwaz Whine & Cheezy

    Messages:
    2,405
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2014
    Yes I do not remember the model codes. A few acer and asus for a demo.

    I settled with GSYNC Acer XB271HU though. It's 2k 2560x1440 and I run it at 165hz.

    I have some weird in between model that has XB270HU plastic with the XB271HU screen and menu. It's strange.

    But it works and it's great! Currently I have it set up on an arm at a desk. My gaming rig mostly gets used for my wife's homework rofl :(
     
  22. pandora's box

    pandora's box [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,279
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2004
    I have a xb271hu at 165hz with a 1080ti. I prefer playing on that vs my 4k LG C6 OLED 55" tv. That's how good gsync is. Sure the OLED provides so much better image quality but the tearing just pulls me right out of the game I'm playing.

    Gsync also allowed me to turn off fps monitoring and just enjoy the game. I can't tell what fps I'm running at unless it dips below 40. I'd highly recommend others with a gsync display try it
     
    Archaea likes this.
  23. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,666
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    I have an Acer x34. It makes a huge difference. However if your gpu can exceed the refresh of lcd consistently at 100hz or more you turn on vsync and you wont see a difference. Gsync actually slows your gpu down to prevent tearing.
     
  24. Armenius

    Armenius [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    11,849
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Citation needed.
     
  25. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,666
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    An LCD operates at a fixed frequency. The GPU attempts to modify the LCDs frequency to keep up with the GPU however many GPUs are significantly faster than LCD refresh rates. And si ce you MUST run VSync to use Gsync both the LCD is manipulated and the GPU is frame rate throttled to maintain a smooth refresh rate. nVidia is only telling half the story here as marketing would demand.

    In many cases an LCD refresh can only be manipulated up to a refresh rate at its maximum limit. In my case 100hz. GSync can slow the LCD but it cant speed it up. If my gpu is making 180fps but the LCD can only do 100 then the combo of gsync and vsync must slow the gpu frame rate as well as modify the lcd to a happy medium. Resting in a tear proof experience.

    http://www.nvidia.in/object/how-does-g-sync-work-in.html
     
  26. Napoleon

    Napoleon Gawd

    Messages:
    961
    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2003
    I'll be running my 1440p 144hz Benq XL2730Z (freesync) with a GTX 1080 with no sync tech enabled. BenQ doesn't offer a comparable G-sync monitor and the other features are too good to pass up, especially for the $380 factory refurbished and warranted price I got it at.
     
  27. aeliusg

    aeliusg Gawd

    Messages:
    690
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2016
    Your GPU's clock speed actually doesn't slow down, but yeah, it won't deliver more frames than the monitor can display in any given period. That's not an issue exclusive to G-Sync, it's how Vsync works. You actually don't even need to run Vsync with G-Sync, ever since one the earliest driver updates. G-Sync picks up the slack below the refresh rate, and you get as many frames as you want above it but with tearing.

    Edit: Also, you can use Fast Sync since you have a 1080 Ti; that means you can have a trifecta of Vsync, G-Sync, and the driver-level triple buffering Nvidia does with Fast Sync on to have your GPU go at "full speed" whether your fps goes above the refresh rate or not.
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2017
    Armenius likes this.
  28. KickAssCop

    KickAssCop [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,387
    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2003
    Get a GSync monitor. Forget AMD. Enjoy gaming.
    Has been my mantra since 7970 series of AMD cards. Can't complain. I pay slightly more for near painless gaming experiences. After GSync you can't go back. Get an ASUS one too since I found them better than the Acer Panels. YMMV.

    1080 Ti + GSync at 1440P 165 Hz is blissful gaming.
    If you got some additional dough to blow you can opt for 3440*1440 34" GSync monitor at 100 Hz. I didn't like that resolution and also low refresh so I gave up on it and went back to the 27" 279Q.

    Going forward, I will probably opt for a 32/34" 16:9 144/200 Hz HDR spec GSync monitor next year.

    My 2 bucks.
     
  29. Iching

    Iching [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,791
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008

    I agree 27" 2560x1440 all day. I've tried all the big monitors 4k etc. and 27" is the optimal size for work and gaming for me. I wish people stopped posting childish posts regarding FreeSync. I'm sorry to shit on people's parade but G-sync is just better.
     
    jologskyblues likes this.
  30. Archaea

    Archaea [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,316
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    What freesync monitor have you tried with what AMD card?
     
  31. Archaea

    Archaea [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,316
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Iching,

    I see you lurking via your profile activity... But no answer?

    So you haven't actually tried a Freesync monitor and an AMD card I guess? Hmmmm -- but clearly Gsync is just better!!! -- and anyone who has tried Freesync and likes the technology is a childish fool?!

    The irony is thick enough to choke on...

    If you haven't actually tried an AMD card/Freesync monitor, and yet made a declarative post like you did ---- and if I owned this site and could verify that - I'd banhammer your rear end permanently.

    Someday I need to make a forum site - just so I can wield that power of ridding lunacy. So many posts in these forums lately where someone compares A vs. B and declares A the clear winner on their experiences, and yet you find out they've never even tried B. The wonders of an anonymous internet...

    ...
    If you have used an AMD GPU and accompanying Freesync monitor and just haven't had a chance to post - then I do apologize. But If you haven't -- then I declare intellectual shame upon you.
     
  32. polydiol

    polydiol [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,235
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    When I ran my 1080ti on my Ben Q Freesync monitor, I had problems with games freezing on exit and lower fps that went away when I switched to my Dell Gsync monitor.
     
  33. jologskyblues

    jologskyblues [H]Lite

    Messages:
    88
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2017

    I still get a tear line at the lower portion of the panel and stutter with G-Sync ON with either V-Sync OFF and FastSync ON. IIRC, Fastsync optimally works when the framerate is more than 2x the refresh rate or else, you get microstutter. The only time I get a truly smooth experience is with G-Sync ON + V-Sync ON and optionally capping the framerate a couple of frames below the max refresh rate of the panel using RTSS. The G-Sync 101 article over at Blurbusters has a comprehensive explanation of the these.
     
  34. CSI_PC

    CSI_PC 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,243
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2016
    I must admit I am rather cynical of the 144Hz+ monitors but not played around with them.
    So from your experience it really is worth considering above 144Hz for games in general or is it just for some very particular twitch gaming?
    Context Gsync/Freesync (which I appreciate is only now reaching 144Hz).
    Thanks
     
  35. LigTasm

    LigTasm [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,922
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    I now have the 240hz monitor, it is slightly noticable but I don't play super fast twitch games. I would say 1440/165 is about the sweet spot right now. GPU power is good enough for that much these days.
     
    CSI_PC likes this.
  36. NukeDukem

    NukeDukem [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    2,028
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    No, these monitors are NOT just for twitch gaming. You will notice and appreciate the "smoothness" of a 144Hz VRR monitor in everything you do, from twitch shooters to RPG's to desktop browsing. I could never go back to 60Hz, just watching the mouse cursor smear all over my screen would drive me nuts!
     
  37. zetsurin

    zetsurin n00bie

    Messages:
    7
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2016
    I've just gone from 1080 Ti + Freesync monitor to an Asus 165Hz G-Sync. Wow. Night and day difference. I say that as a former huge cynic about these sorts of things. Last few years I was happy as hell mostly console gaming. That has now changed.
     
    Armenius likes this.
  38. harmattan

    harmattan 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,868
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    I had a XB241YU (g-sync) and an Asus MG279q (freesync) with a 295x2 and 1080, but then upgraded to a LG 27UD68P (freesync) and am now using a 1080 ti. G-sync/Freesync does smooth things out, but at the end of the day I'd rather sink the money saved on more a finer display and GPU performance than g-sync.
     
  39. jologskyblues

    jologskyblues [H]Lite

    Messages:
    88
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2017
    I replaced my PG279Q with an X34. Ultrawide is great and all but now I'm going through high refresh rate and high frame rate withdrawal. I've been tempted to go back to a 144+Hz G-Sync monitor for a while now but I just decided to wait until I can get my hands on the PG358VQ or the X35 and Volta so I can have both 1440p ultrawide and high refresh in one monitor. HDR is just a bonus.
     
  40. KickAssCop

    KickAssCop [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,387
    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2003
    My biggest problem with UW was that I felt I always did not know everything going on the screen which made my OCD run rampant and also made me cross eyed trying to look at the corners. Second issue was, the low refresh of course. Finally, lack of support and the black bars in many games that I played without going for a hack fix that either messed up vertical or horizontal viewing (all those WSG forum fixes lol) just didn't do it for me.

    Anyways, back to this thread. It would be nice for the OP to actually respond.
     
    Armenius likes this.