- Nov 22, 2008
It wasn't running at 4k though. It was running at a lower 21:9 3440x1440 resolution (or whatever that first number is), of which 4k is 67% more pixels. Just by extrapolation alone, a GTX 1080 should average over 70fps with the same settings.
I think that's where this comment comes from,
But yeah next time i'd suggest finding a pair of monitors that are the same panels, with the free sync being a samsung LTM340YP03 and g-sync being a LG LM340WU2-SSA1, it's a variable that could be controlled? Assuming the objective is a look just at freesync and g-sync operation not necessarily implementation and product line.
It's all a matter of objective, seeing as this is a vega preview, makes me wonder if vega handles freesync in a different matter from current cards. It's hard to say, seeing as this idea is an extension of what AMD was doing, maybe AMD just thought freesync needed promotion and VS format is a popular promotion format.
That's a valid point to find similar panels but does it really matter when one panel is almost twice the price if it gives a similar experience?
The impression I got, was that AMD and Vega are better at handling the Vulkan API than NVIDIA is. FreeSync vs. G-Sync are so close as you wouldn't really be able to tell them apart when the frame rates you are getting are sufficient. The difference between the two systems was minimal, but clear. The Vega system felt snappier, but you couldn't say "hey, it gets xx frames more than the NVIDIA system."
Yes he did. I was shocked to learn that Vega was in System 2.
I'd love to see this applied to more games.