[AnandTech] Nvidia G-Sync Review

[Terpfen]

Not at all. Especially when it is limited to specific models, adds extra cost and will never be widely supported by the market.

Welcome to computing. And this is not the forum to complain about extra cost--this forum thrives on extra cost. Or have you not looked at the case modding subforum?

By the way, what do you mean by "never be widely supported by the market"? It's not as if games need to be coded to take advantage of G-Sync, ala Mantle or TrueAudio. You get an Nvidia GPU, you plug it into a G-Sync display via Displayport 1.2, and you're set for the usable life of your display. There is no additional support needed.

 

[SilverSliver]

Welcome to computing. And this is not the forum to complain about extra cost--this forum thrives on extra cost. Or have you not looked at the case modding subforum?

By the way, what do you mean by "never be widely supported by the market"? It's not as if games need to be coded to take advantage of G-Sync, ala Mantle or TrueAudio. You get an Nvidia GPU, you plug it into a G-Sync display via Displayport 1.2, and you're set for the usable life of your display. There is no additional support needed.

I guess at the end of the day, someone is going to need to convince me that a $500+ monitor @ 60hz and 60fps w/ G-Sync looks better than a <$300 monitor @ 120hz and 120fps without G-Sync.

Perhaps the point is that 120hz and thusly, beefier hardware to get those frames to solve the smoothness issue is not needed with G-Sync. Maybe? I don't know. I think I would have to see it to believe it.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

I guess at the end of the day, someone is going to need to convince me that a $500+ monitor @ 60hz and 60fps w/ G-Sync looks better than a <$300 monitor @ 120hz and 120fps without G-Sync.

Perhaps the point is that 120hz and thusly, beefier hardware to get those frames to solve the smoothness issue is not needed with G-Sync. Maybe? I don't know. I think I would have to see it to believe it.

The only confirmed monitor is 144Hz, though those $500+ monitors will certainly look better than a TN for a number of things.

 

[SilverSliver]

The only confirmed monitor is 144Hz, though those $500+ monitors will certainly look better than a TN for a number of things.

Who said anything about TN?

 

[Unknown-One]

Who said anything about TN?

Well, he did, by bringing up 144Hz monitors (the majority of which are TN panels)

 

[LordEC911]

So you'd prefer no choice over choice?

I would prefer a choice that moves the market/technology forward not add additional stagnation.

A good solution now is preferable to a perfect solution later, assuming the good-now solution doesn't preclude the possibility of the perfect-later solution, which G-Sync doesn't.

It actually does. Making display manufacturers rely on a proprietary add-on rather than actual move the display technology forward doesn't help anyone.

Why would you care about wide market support ?

All you need is one good monitor with g-sync that fits your preferences and you are set for next few years.

Because without wide market support it will not actually move us past 20year old displays.

Welcome to computing. And this is not the forum to complain about extra cost--this forum thrives on extra cost. Or have you not looked at the case modding subforum?

By the way, what do you mean by "never be widely supported by the market"? It's not as if games need to be coded to take advantage of G-Sync, ala Mantle or TrueAudio. You get an Nvidia GPU, you plug it into a G-Sync display via Displayport 1.2, and you're set for the usable life of your display. There is no additional support needed.

It is, haven't you seen everyone complaining about prices in every other thread?
This case modding forum is a step down from what I am use to seeing but I'm glad you are proud of this forum.

Actually games do need to be coded for G-Sync in a way. G-Sync does not work on 100% of games. By market support, read above...

 

[IdiotInCharge]

I would prefer a choice that moves the market/technology forward not add additional stagnation.

So you believe that this technology would just effervesce out of nothingness if Nvidia didn't push it?

By creating something as useful as G-Sync, Nvidia is challenging the market to either adopt their solution or to find a way to compete. In either case the market and associated technology moves forward. How is that stagnation?

 

[LordEC911]

So you believe that this technology would just effervesce out of nothingness if Nvidia didn't push it?

By creating something as useful as G-Sync, Nvidia is challenging the market to either adopt their solution or to find a way to compete. In either case the market and associated technology moves forward. How is that stagnation?

Just like PhsyX right?

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Just like PhsyX right?

Exactly like PhysX.

 

[wonderfield]

It actually does. Making display manufacturers rely on a proprietary add-on rather than actual move the display technology forward doesn't help anyone.

Display vendors have had over a decade to move the technology forward. They chose not to. The support for source-based control of the blanking interval could've been supported in 2002 with the HDMI standard. With it, non-isochronous display updates controlled by an HDMI source via data packets. For the layman: standardized G-Sync.

 

[Cr4ckm0nk3y]

Exactly like PhysX.

This!

 

[Unknown-One]

It actually does. Making display manufacturers rely on a proprietary add-on rather than actual move the display technology forward doesn't help anyone.

How, exactly, are they reliant upon a proprietary add-on?

There is absolutely nothing stopping display manufactures from making their own hardware that runs synchronous to the current v-blanking interval being shoved down a DisplayPort cable.
There's also absolutely nothing stopping other video card manufacturers from varying the v-blank interval of their DisplayPort outputs so that synchronous-capable monitors will run in-sync.

This is all based around a pre-existing feature of DisplayPort, Nvidia is just the first to implement hardware and drivers that leverage it for desktop users...

 

[LordEC911]

How, exactly, are they reliant upon a proprietary add-on?

There is absolutely nothing stopping display manufactures from making their own hardware that runs synchronous to the current v-blanking interval being shoved down a DisplayPort cable.
There's also absolutely nothing stopping other video card manufacturers from varying the v-blank interval of their DisplayPort outputs so that synchronous-capable monitors will run in-sync.

This is all based around a pre-existing feature of DisplayPort, Nvidia is just the first to implement hardware and drivers that leverage it for desktop users...

You just answered your own questions without realizing it?

 

[Terpfen]

Actually games do need to be coded for G-Sync in a way.

This is false. I don't know how else to say it. It's either a misunderstanding or a lie. This is like saying that games need to be coded specifically for a DVI, VGA, Displayport, or HDMI connection.

 

[wonderfield]

Games do need to run full-screen, but that's the only stipulation.

 

[PRIME1]

I would prefer a choice that moves the market/technology forward not add additional stagnation.

You have a choice. You can either move forward with G-Sync or stay where you are at. No one is forcing this upon anyone.

If you are waiting for AMD to catch up....good luck .

 

[LordEC911]

This is false. I don't know how else to say it. It's either a misunderstanding or a lie. This is like saying that games need to be coded specifically for a DVI, VGA, Displayport, or HDMI connection.

So Nvidia lied when they said not all games will work for G-Sync?
You should let them know.

You have a choice. You can either move forward with G-Sync or stay where you are at. No one is forcing this upon anyone.

If you are waiting for AMD to catch up....good luck .

Yep, you are right I do have a choice but the people thinking this is going to revolutionize the industry... well they will be sorely dissapointed.

AMD has something in the works that is actually beneficial to all consumers.

 

[wonderfield]

So Nvidia lied when they said not all games will work for G-Sync?
You should let them know.

Where did they state this? 'Cause in the G-Sync FAQ...

Q: Does NVIDIA G-SYNC work for all games?
A: NVIDIA G-SYNC works with all games. However, we have found some games that do not behave well and for those games we recommend that users take advantage of our control panel&#8217;s ability to disable G-SYNC per game. Games that NVIDIA discovers that have trouble with G-SYNC will be disabled by default in our driver.

 

[Terpfen]

wonderfield, you beat me to it.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

AMD has something in the works that is actually beneficial to all consumers.

They're both about as beneficial as the other; well, apparently you can get G-Sync monitors soon, so maybe not.

 

[StoleMyOwnCar]

So Nvidia lied when they said not all games will work for
Yep, you are right I do have a choice but the people thinking this is going to revolutionize the industry... well they will be sorely dissapointed.

AMD has something in the works that is actually beneficial to all consumers.

Good god what is your problem? You're sitting here complaining about how a company wants to make money off of something they made for gamers that other companies (who have had the capability, but who cares) have not, rather selflessly revolutionizing the industry for the good of everyone. Do you know how silly this sounds?

GSync is simply a product that does exactly what it says it will do, and there are people interested in said product. You can buy it or not, sitting here whining about how a company is trying to make money off of something instead of revolutionizing the industry or some crap is just idiocy. If it's not worth it to you, then vote with your wallet and pass it up. Though, the people just blindly saying it's useless before trying it is kinda silly.

 

[LordEC911]

Where did they state this? 'Cause in the G-Sync FAQ...

Sorry. That is what I was thinking of. I should have said, "not all games benefit from G-Sync."
My apologies.

Good god what is your problem? You're sitting here complaining about how a company wants to make money off of something they made for gamers that other companies (who have had the capability, but who cares) have not, rather selflessly revolutionizing the industry for the good of everyone. Do you know how silly this sounds?

GSync is simply a product that does exactly what it says it will do, and there are people interested in said product. You can buy it or not, sitting here whining about how a company is trying to make money off of something instead of revolutionizing the industry or some crap is just idiocy. If it's not worth it to you, then vote with your wallet and pass it up. Though, the people just blindly saying it's useless before trying it is kinda silly.

Yep. Exactly. I don't see how it will move the industry forward.
This technology has an expiration date and I don't see the point in anyone investing in it, especially at the current rip-off prices, when it has a very limited market.

 

[Venomous]

The expiration date on PC displays are far longer than modern LCD tv's, so gsync will be around until it's no longer needed. You can bet 6 yrs before anything even starts to tap on it's back door.

 

[fdiaz78]

I'll wait until G-sync goes down in price with economies of scale and ramp up production. I never buy version 1 hardware anyway to let the early adopters pay more. I'll get a panel in a few years.

 

[PRIME1]

Yep, you are right I do have a choice but the people thinking this is going to revolutionize the industry... well they will be sorely dissapointed.

I guess you did not read the review

"In pathological cases the impact can be shocking, particularly if you’re coming from a 60Hz panel today (with or without v-sync). The smoothness afforded by G-Sync is just awesome. "

Nothing released in the last few years even compares.

 

[Unknown-One]

You just answered your own questions without realizing it?

I answered how it was proprietary by listing all the ways that it's not?

It's using a standard feature of DisplayPort that non-Nvidia hardware (mostly tablets) already employs. Anyone can implement this feature... so I ask again, how is this proprietary?

 

[Unknown-One]

So Nvidia lied when they said not all games will work for G-Sync?
You should let them know.

Not all games support full-screen mode (which G-Sync requires).

Any game that runs in a window, or uses the fake "full screen window" technique, will not work with G-Sync.

That's really the only thing that prevents it from working with all games.

 

[Cr4ckm0nk3y]

Yep. Exactly. I don't see how it will move the industry forward.

You really don't see how G-Sync will move us forward??? Really?

What is one thing most gamers strive to attain? Smooth game play. After all that is why you saw people picking up Titans at $1000.

If G-Sync removes tearing and skipping as promised then it is definitely going to move the industry forward. Current monitor tech has remained stagnant because monitor manufacturers were solely relying on the GPU's to fix the issue and never looked at what their own engineering could do to help. But now NV is using a tech that relies on both the monitor and GPU.

If you can't see that as moving forward you might want to go see an optometrist. Any step advance is still a step forward.

This technology has an expiration date

Does it? Exactly when will it expire? What other technology will push G-Sync into an early grave?

I don't see the point in anyone investing in it,

Asus, BenQ, Viewsonic, and Philips seem to think you are wrong.

especially at the current rip-off prices, when it has a very limited market.

How are the prices a ripoff? The mod cards and only Asus monitor are in pre-order and early access. The other monitors aren't suppose to be out until Q1 2014. So based on early access pricing you automatically claim the prices are a rip-off?

What price should they use?

At this point G-Sync is obviously a enthusiast product, marketed to enthusiasts, and using an enthusiast monitors. $199 to most PC gamers is not a big deal considering many have $400-500 GPU's.

Once all 4 manufacturers start releasing G-Sync monitors you may find a nice variety in options at different price points. NV even said as the tech becomes more mainstream they would like to get the G-Sync boards down to $100.

Frankly I would gladly pay and additional $200 premium for a 1440p with G-sync.

 

[LordEC911]

I guess you did not read the review

"In pathological cases the impact can be shocking, particularly if you’re coming from a 60Hz panel today (with or without v-sync). The smoothness afforded by G-Sync is just awesome. "

Nothing released in the last few years even compares.

Yes I did read/watch almost all the interviews, first-looks, reviews, etc.
There are a lot of conditions that need to be met to really show G-Sync's benefits.

I answered how it was proprietary by listing all the ways that it's not?

It's using a standard feature of DisplayPort that non-Nvidia hardware (mostly tablets) already employs. Anyone can implement this feature... so I ask again, how is this proprietary?

Needing a Kepler card... and a Nvidia add-on board.

Not all games support full-screen mode (which G-Sync requires).

Any game that runs in a window, or uses the fake "full screen window" technique, will not work with G-Sync.

That's really the only thing that prevents it from working with all games.

There is another requirement in the game engine that can cause G-Sync to not show any benefits in-game.

 

[Terpfen]

There is another requirement in the game engine that can cause G-Sync to not show any benefits in-game.

Name this requirement.

 

[JustinSane]

I don't understand all the hate for G-Sync? It looks amazing. I can't possibly see why you wouldn't want it.

 

[Cr4ckm0nk3y]

There are a lot of conditions that need to be met to really show G-Sync's benefits.

Get a compatible GPU and monitor is a lot of conditions?

There is another requirement in the game engine that can cause G-Sync to not show any benefits in-game.

What requirement?

The only thing the game engine has to do is support full screen. There is no requirement for the game engine to be coded specifically for G-Sync.

In fact the only software required will be the G-Sync software bundled with the GPU driver.

 

[MorgothPl]

Is G-Sync only limited to the TN 144/120 hz panels? Or can we hope for some AMVA+ / IPS / PLS 60hz screens G-Sync? Because I've seen some of the 144hz panels (AOC notably), and it was bad even for TN as colours and angles were concerned.

 

[Terpfen]

Is G-Sync only limited to the TN 144/120 hz panels? Or can we hope for some AMVA+ / IPS / PLS 60hz screens G-Sync? Because I've seen some of the 144hz panels (AOC notably), and it was bad even for TN as colours and angles were concerned.

It's not limited to any type of panel. A display vendor just needs to insert G-Sync into a given product and release it. The only announced display is a G-Sync version of the VG248QE. More are coming. They just haven't been announced yet.

I'd imagine they're waiting for CES.

 

[Unknown-One]

Needing a Kepler card... and a Nvidia add-on board

Have you not been reading my posts in this thread? Did you even read the post you quoted?

This isn't anything proprietary, it's part of the DisplayPort spec. There's already non-Nvidia hardware that leverages dynamic refresh rates (look up embedded DisplayPort devices, using variable v-blank interval as a display timing source is what G-Sync does and it's 100% supported by the spec). ANYONE can implement dynamic refresh rates without having to license anything from Nvidia.

So, I ask AGAIN, how is this in any way proprietary? Nvidia didn't invent anything new, and they aren't even the first to implement this tech. All they've done is slapped a fancy label on it and added support to their cards (while also pushing monitor manufactures to support it). That doesn't make it a proprietary tech, though.

 

[AndreRio]

Not all games support full-screen mode (which G-Sync requires).

Any game that runs in a window, or uses the fake "full screen window" technique, will not work with G-Sync.

That's really the only thing that prevents it from working with all games.

does this mean that I wont be able to use gsync to browse the internet? that's crazy horrible. what's is it good for then?

 

[Klapcos]

I don't understand all the hate for G-Sync? It looks amazing. I can't possibly see why you wouldn't want it.

There just jealous AMD fanboys hating. STFU and GTFO these forums if you don't like new tech. moving forward!

 

[LordEC911]

Name this requirement.

Do some research... It was straight from Nvidia.

It's not limited to any type of panel. A display vendor just needs to insert G-Sync into a given product and release it. The only announced display is a G-Sync version of the VG248QE. More are coming. They just haven't been announced yet.

I'd imagine they're waiting for CES.

The specific panel does indeed need to have the correct internals/specifications to allow for G-Sync. Overlord gave some good insight into what it requires.

Have you not been reading my posts in this thread? Did you even read the post you quoted?

This isn't anything proprietary, it's part of the DisplayPort spec. There's already non-Nvidia hardware that leverages dynamic refresh rates (look up embedded DisplayPort devices, using variable v-blank interval as a display timing source is what G-Sync does and it's 100% supported by the spec). ANYONE can implement dynamic refresh rates without having to license anything from Nvidia.

So, I ask AGAIN, how is this in any way proprietary? Nvidia didn't invent anything new, and they aren't even the first to implement this tech. All they've done is slapped a fancy label on it and added support to their cards (while also pushing monitor manufactures to support it). That doesn't make it a proprietary tech, though.

Oh ok. Let me know when that happens...
This isn't some sort of open standard, there is specific hardware in Kepler to allow G-Sync as well as multiple patents.
The same way that PhysX isn't proprietary?

 

[Terpfen]

Do some research... It was straight from Nvidia.

It's not my job to support your arguments. That's your job. Back up what you say.

The specific panel does indeed need to have the correct internals/specifications to allow for G-Sync. Overlord gave some good insight into what it requires.

You're confused by the difference between a panel and a display. There is nothing about G-Sync that makes it exclusive or inherent to TN panels or unable to operate on IPS panels. However, a display must have a G-Sync module installed to use the technology.

This isn't some sort of open standard, there is specific hardware in Kepler to allow G-Sync as well as multiple patents.

That "specific hardware" is a Displayport connector.

 

[Psychor]

I don't understand all the hate for G-Sync? It looks amazing. I can't possibly see why you wouldn't want it.

Because people love to complain about what they don't have and/or can't get for one reason or another. The same thing happened when 4K PC displays started to sell.

I just returned my third 4K Dell display and my next venture into display land will be multiple G-Sync displays in portrait.