• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Decided on Freesync Panel - am I screwed?

R

Rustynuts

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 6, 2003
Messages
10,346
Ordered a Korean 27 1440 monitor with Freesync (up to 90Hz), but also does 144Hz non-free. With all the gpu turmoil right now, I'm wondering what card to buy. Was looking at the 10xx lineup, but then gave up on buying a gsync panel. Still figure I can bust out the Hz with a gtx 100x card and be happy.

But, should I even consider a new AMD card now? Seems the price point might be better than a 1070 with similar performance and I'd get to use freesync?
 
Last edited:
It should be slower then GTX 1070 in general. Although at the moment it should be better perf/$ in general. But keep in mind this is still rather speculatively.

But taking advantage of variable refresh would probably give a real world experience larger then the actual performance gap in a blind test sense. Although I don't know the exact the characteristics of your display (this is an issue with Freesync is experience variability), mostly in terms of LFC support and minimum refresh.

VRR is a quasi platform lock in at this point. The other consideration would be whether or not what you play greatly favors one over the other.
 
Wait for reviews of the RX 480 to come out before deciding. I think you'll be perfectly happy without the variable refresh rate, but in my opinion VRR is a pretty big deal for which you should have decided what video card you wanted before committing to a display with one technology over the other.
 
Yikes. I agree with Armenius; adaptive sync is a game-changer on its own, having more of an impact than the performance increase of your average GPU upgrade.

If you're like me, when you play within the variable range of the monitor, lower FPS feels that much smoother, and you will actually need less GPU horsepower for the same experience as that of a faster GPU on a non-sync monitor.

Hopefully Polaris comes with enough oomph to meet your needs so you're not waiting too long on an upgrade.
 
Not sure VRR is that big an issue right now with most current games. I know it's the big thing, but seems like most games don't push things that far yet except for 4k?
I seem to do just fine in most games with a lone 970 at 1920x 1200 at max quality.

I really wanted to get gsync, but with the spotty panel quality and uber price penalty, didn't bite. Esp in IPS variants. Really didn't want to plunk down $1200+ for a widescreen gsync still doing only 1440 Rez
 
Freesync range can usually be hacked to extend it a decent amount, you wouldn't sell many gouge market screens if you can get the same result for $200 less and another hundred less on GPUs..
 
When the gpu isn't fully loaded, you can see side by side tests on utube that show virtually no difference between gsync, vsync, and nothing.

I'm hoping to survive on gpu power alone, and if a certain game really needs it, crank down the refresh. Or try the "free" 75hz n-sync. If I stick with a 10xx card.
 
I think you'll be fine. At 1440P you should be able to lock 60-75Hz with full detail in 90+% of titles with a 1080.

You bought a Korean panel, so you got it stupid cheap to begin with. Freesync was just a nice plus, getting the panel cheap is why you chose it in the first place. If you run it like a "normal" panel it's no real loss.
 
Rustynuts said:
Not sure VRR is that big an issue right now with most current games. I know it's the big thing, but seems like most games don't push things that far yet except for 4k?
I seem to do just fine in most games with a lone 970 at 1920x 1200 at max quality.

I really wanted to get gsync, but with the spotty panel quality and uber price penalty, didn't bite. Esp in IPS variants. Really didn't want to plunk down $1200+ for a widescreen gsync still doing only 1440 Rez
Click to expand...
What games are you playing and at what framerate at that 1920x1200 resolution? At 2560x1440 most modern games including Dying Light, Witcher 3, and Rise of the Tomb Raider run between 60 and 90 FPS on the machine in my sig. This happens to be the range in which VRR, specifically G-Sync, truly shine on a 144 Hz panel. G-Sync allows me to forget about that metric and just turn quality settings up until it no longer feels right, which generally doesn't happen until you drop below 40 Hz and the scalar starts holding frames to maintain fluidity and prevent flashing.

I can understand the quality concerns, but those issues are plaguing the entire PC display market regardless of the target consumer. I was all in for my PG278Q for $808 including 2-day shipping around the time it first came out. The same monitor can be had for $600-$700 right now, including the IPS variant PG279Q. The only G-Sync displays over $1,000 USD right now are the ultrawides.
Rustynuts said:
When the gpu isn't fully loaded, you can see side by side tests on utube that show virtually no difference between gsync, vsync, and nothing.

I'm hoping to survive on gpu power alone, and if a certain game really needs it, crank down the refresh. Or try the "free" 75hz n-sync. If I stick with a 10xx card.
Click to expand...
You can't appreciate the impact VRR has in a questionable quality video on Youtube. Personally, I'll never use a static refresh rate screen again for gaming. Most people I've seen around the 'net seem to feel the same way when experiencing it for the first time in person.
 
Yep, freesync monitors work just fine with nvidia, you just don't get adaptive sync.

And hey, when nvidia finally bites the bullet and bows to the inevitable, you'll get adaptive sync then. No telling how long they'll hold out, though. Sigh.
 
schizo said:
Yep, freesync monitors work just fine with nvidia, you just don't get adaptive sync.

And hey, when nvidia finally bites the bullet and bows to the inevitable, you'll get adaptive sync then. No telling how long they'll hold out, though. Sigh.
Click to expand...

That's the most frustrating part -- it's a 100% software thing. No reason they can't support it, they just don't want to.
 
In fact, nvidia ALREADY supports adaptive sync-- but only on laptops. They just need to flip a bit in the drivers. It's a 100% business decision. (And the wrong one!)
 
schizo said:
In fact, nvidia ALREADY supports adaptive sync-- but only on laptops. They just need to flip a bit in the drivers. It's a 100% business decision. (And the wrong one!)
Click to expand...

If that's true I'm surprised someone hasn't found and flipped said bit.
 
schizo said:
In fact, nvidia ALREADY supports adaptive sync-- but only on laptops. They just need to flip a bit in the drivers. It's a 100% business decision. (And the wrong one!)
Click to expand...

No It's not. Nvidia's Adaptive sync requires a local frame buffer in the display (so you can maintain your sync even outside the display's sweet spot). This is incredibly important for weaker mobile cards, but adds cost. DisplayPort supports the local frame buffer for the purposes of power-saving, and Nvidia just reused it for sync.

Freesync by the very nature of "free" does not require a local frame buffer, hence the reason you're stuck with the annoyance of a different sweet-spot on every single monitor.

In my mind if you care that much about a little tearing, then you should just go whole-hog Gsync. Why play games with your monitor's frame rate limitations? You'll spend more time tweaking each game to get around such issues than you spend playing it :(
 
Wait, so... DP inherently supports the local framebuffer? Doesn't it follow then that any DP monitor could be made effectively G-Sync compatible? Or am I misunderstanding?
 
silent-circuit said:
Wait, so... DP inherently supports the local framebuffer? Doesn't it follow then that any DP monitor could be made effectively G-Sync compatible? Or am I misunderstanding?
Click to expand...

Yup, it's specifically called eDP. It's intended to replace the old LVDS display connections on laptops, and also add a whole new set of features. But it's nearly the same as normal DisplayPort.

Embedded DisplayPort: Increased flexibility and power savings render greater display efficiency

VESA Rolls Out Production-Ready Embedded DisplayPort Standard 1.4 for Mobile Personal Computing Devices | VESA
 
Ok, but desktop displays use the "normal" standard, so no framebuffer? Or is it still there? Sorry, slightly tipsy and not looking to wade through whitepapers.
 
Right.

eDP already has the ability to control the frame rate, as does DisplayPort. This is how Freesync works.

The local frame buffer is an optional part of the standard.

The reason the local frame buffer exists in eDP is because LCDs have to be redrawn at a minimum rate or they will lose their data. So even when you're staring at a static webpage reading this post, your LCD display is drawing the same screen 60 times a second.

That's extremely expensive on a notebook because you have the high cost of sending that high-bandwidth data over a long cable. IT also requires the GPU to stay awake more often to drive that link.

A local frame buffer plus a dedicated asic to drive the screen from that local frame buffer can save a lot of power if you're viewing mostly static content. The local frame buffer is much closer to the screen = less power to access, and the dedicated ASIC is much lower power than that big GPU. The GPU goes to sleep until something changes.

The eDP link between video card and monitor is only activated when the image changes.

But that dedicated hardware adds cost, so it's only used on more expensive low-power systems, where every watt is important.
 
Rustynuts said:
Not sure VRR is that big an issue right now with most current games.
Click to expand...
VRR can smooth out all the dips and stutters in frame rate and make a game that dips to around 30fps feel more like its running at 60fps constantly.

Some people just don't notice it and others the change in frame rate sticks out like a sore thumb. Its one of those things you have to see in person to know if it'll be a big deal for you.
 
Rustynuts said:
Not sure VRR is that big an issue right now with most current games. I know it's the big thing, but seems like most games don't push things that far yet except for 4k?
I seem to do just fine in most games with a lone 970 at 1920x 1200 at max quality.

I really wanted to get gsync, but with the spotty panel quality and uber price penalty, didn't bite. Esp in IPS variants. Really didn't want to plunk down $1200+ for a widescreen gsync still doing only 1440 Rez
Click to expand...

It'll have to depend on the final numbers but if we go by the revised crossfire scaling comment for AoTS then RX 480 would be a very questionable upgrade from a GTX 970. If you want to take advantage of FreeSync you'd be better off considering waiting for Vega on the AMD side.
 
I'm in the same situation here. Have an Asus MQ279Q Freesync which I love (no dead pixels, great uniformity, no defects). I really don't see 480 giving me my 50-60 fps ideal or even staying within 32-132hz (hacked) at 1440p in all games. Further, I'd rather not go multi-GPU due to mediocre past and current experience with Crossfire.

I do really like the smoothing effect adaptive sync/freesync offers. I will not, however, compromise on performance just to keep it.
 
I have a FreeSync monitor. I didn't notice a single bit of difference when I switched from a 970 to a 390X. I'm thinking about going back to an Nvidia card.
 
HeavensCloud said:
I have a FreeSync monitor. I didn't notice a single bit of difference when I switched from a 970 to a 390X. I'm thinking about going back to an Nvidia card.
Click to expand...

Sometimes it depends on the games. Not all of them play nice and smooth.
 
HeavensCloud said:
I have a FreeSync monitor. I didn't notice a single bit of difference when I switched from a 970 to a 390X. I'm thinking about going back to an Nvidia card.
Click to expand...

Depends on what games you play. In most of those I play there's a real noticeable improvement with Freesync active.
 
HeavensCloud said:
I have a FreeSync monitor. I didn't notice a single bit of difference when I switched from a 970 to a 390X. I'm thinking about going back to an Nvidia card.
Click to expand...

VRR makes the most difference if you are at a borderline performance level which you may not be at. It also depends on your sensitivity to certain things (if you can't a notice a difference with vysnc off for example). The other issue is that FreeSync does have large quality variation especially if you are on of those 48hz min refresh displays with no LFC.
 
limitedaccess said:
VRR makes the most difference if you are at a borderline performance level which you may not be at. It also depends on your sensitivity to certain things (if you can't a notice a difference with vysnc off for example). The other issue is that FreeSync does have large quality variation especially if you are on of those 48hz min refresh displays with no LFC.
Click to expand...

Right, this is why I hesitate to recommend *sync, because unless you're nuts about tearing THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN EFFECTIVE FRAME TIME between a VRR monitor and and a regular 1ms monitor with VSYNC OFF. It's sending the frames to the monitor at exactly the same rate.

And if you are insistent that tearing is the worst thing you've ever seen, then I recommend GSYNC because the local frame buffer typically gives you much lower sync range (and it's the same for each monitor)
 
Last edited:
So nvidia's mobile gsync does use standard displayport tech, but only mobile panels choose to implement the displayport buffer, is that the gist of it? My understanding is that mobile gsync was essentially VESA adaptive sync, but nvidia restricted it in software. That's wrong?
 
This has been making my monitor purchasing decision difficult as well. I've no idea what to buy...
 
Rustynuts said:
Ordered a Korean 27 1440 monitor with Freesync (up to 90Hz), but also does 144Hz non-free. With all the gpu turmoil right now, I'm wondering what card to buy. Was looking at the 10xx lineup, but then gave up on buying a gsync panel. Still figure I can bust out the Hz with a gtx 100x card and be happy.

But, should I even consider a new AMD card now? Seems the price point might be better than a 1070 with similar performance and I'd get to use freesync?
Click to expand...

Bad timing to commit to a tech path. :(

The initial reports from AMD point to a great 1440p performance/$. Add a freesync monitor and, if the ~$250 cost for the 8GB Polaris card is right, then that's one cost. (Monitor plus card.)
Do the same math for Nvidia, but with a gsync.

Now, the AMD cards have not been reviewed, so it's all speculation. (And, I notice you're combining a freesync monitor with a potential nvidia purchase. Okay.)

By mid-July I'd think the reviews would be in and there'd be some choice in products from AIB vendors. Hold off on a gpu until then.
 
{NG}Fidel said:
This has been making my monitor purchasing decision difficult as well. I've no idea what to buy...
Click to expand...

I am in the exact same boat as you. I have decided to see which new card I get next. It would be good if a manufacturer would have both G-Sync and Freesync in one monitor or Nvidia would allow Freesync to work with there cards. It would make our decision so much easier.
 
c3k said:
Bad timing to commit to a tech path. :(


Now, the AMD cards have not been reviewed, so it's all speculation. (And, I notice you're combining a freesync monitor with a potential nvidia purchase. Okay.)
Click to expand...

I was mainly looking at high refresh since giving up on gsync. Too expensive, too many QC problems. The Freesync was just a bonus with the panel I bought. Never considered AMD until now. Not even sure Freesync is enabled on this panel, conflicting reports online. It shows up in the OSD menu, but may be part of their generic software and won't engage anyway.
 
Rustynuts said:
I was mainly looking at high refresh since giving up on gsync. Too expensive, too many QC problems. The Freesync was just a bonus with the panel I bought. Never considered AMD until now. Not even sure Freesync is enabled on this panel, conflicting reports online. It shows up in the OSD menu, but may be part of their generic software and won't engage anyway.
Click to expand...

What's the model number of the monitor? Some of the first Korean monitors to support FreeSync had to be updated to enable it. The good thing is that you can use any GPU with the panel and it will work fine. Just that if you want FreeSync enabled you'll need an AMD card to utilize it. I have a buddy with a monstrous LG 3440 x 1440 widescreen FreeSync panel and he's undecided about going Nvidia or AMD. He is never going to pay the GSYNC tax; he just doesn't believe it is worth the extra money. Right now he has a R9 390 and is looking to do a big upgrade. He probably won't decide until the 1080ti is out at least. He does love FreeSync though so maybe a couple of stop gate cards like the RX 480 are in his future until Vega?
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
It's a brand new model called Crossover 27 Fast 144mHz. That's it. Here's the freesync discussion.

"I asked dream-seller on ebay if Crossover 27 FAST 144 supported freesync. His answer is no...."

"Just had a new message from dream-seller, he talked to manufacturer and they said 27 Fast 144 supports Freesync at 60hz"

Supposedly same panel as ASUS MG279Q

Korean website. Doesn't show on the English site.
http://www.crosslcd.co.kr/main.html?tmp=product&pg=27fast
 
schizo said:
So nvidia's mobile gsync does use standard displayport tech, but only mobile panels choose to implement the displayport buffer, is that the gist of it? My understanding is that mobile gsync was essentially VESA adaptive sync, but nvidia restricted it in software. That's wrong?
Click to expand...

No you are correct, Mobile G-Sync is nothing more then VESA adaptive sync that Nvidia opened up via a software path in their drivers..That is how a few Asus/Clevo gaming laptops were able to get G-Sync working before Nvidia even mentioned bringing it to mobile applications..
 
I also own a freesync monitor and I want to get a gtx1070. Is there no way to utilize freesync with nv cards?
 
Dark12 said:
I also own a freesync monitor and I want to get a gtx1070. Is there no way to utilize freesync with nv cards?
Click to expand...

Not unless AMD has enough market share or the silent majority of Nvidia users bitch and bitch and bitch and make a huge online fuss.

Until then, bend over and pray to g-$ink or jump ship to AMD. G$ink is a little like gameworks of monitors.
 
Dark12 said:
I also own a freesync monitor and I want to get a gtx1070. Is there no way to utilize freesync with nv cards?
Click to expand...
Not sure if possible on all monitors, but some support N-sync up to 75Hz via software only. Kinda like using normal V-sync I guess but smoother. Some of the Korean monitors mentioned that. Not sure if mine can, wasn't in the eBay ad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top