LG 48CX

Yeah this is why LCD screens above 120hz are dumb. They can't actually transition that fast, it's all just marketing bullshit that leads to a blurry mess of overshoot.
Well that’s not true at all. There are plenty of LCD panels that have fast enough response times to keep up with higher refresh rates than 120Hz. 240Hz is pretty common nowadays and even VA panels, traditionally the slowest, can keep up with that now on the new Samsung G7 screens. Pixels response times won’t be as fast as OLED certainly but those screens have a higher refresh rate than the OLED screens
 
Well that’s not true at all. There are plenty of LCD panels that have fast enough response times to keep up with higher refresh rates than 120Hz. 240Hz is pretty common nowadays and even VA panels, traditionally the slowest, can keep up with that now on the new Samsung G7 screens. Pixels response times won’t be as fast as OLED certainly but those screens have a higher refresh rate than the OLED screens
Yea, but at what cost? The Linus video shows the 360hz panel is a smeary mess in full motion, while the 120hz OLED is crisp and clear. I think we've hit the point of diminishing returns on LCD tech. Sure you can layer image over image over image, but you lose detail.
 
Yea, but at what cost? The Linus video shows the 360hz panel is a smeary mess in full motion, while the 120hz OLED is crisp and clear. I think we've hit the point of diminishing returns on LCD tech. Sure you can layer image over image over image, but you lose detail.

"crisp and clear" doesn't help that much when you're limited to a refresh every 1/120th of a second. If you listen to the commentary and pay attention, what is actually being depicted here is that the motion on the 360hz display is smoother and better even if each individual frame on the OLED is clearer. Displaying the footage this way hides the motion blur inherent to the refresh rate.

That said, 120hz BFI on the OLED produces possibly the best motion resolution on any sample-and-hold display out there, based on the TFTCentral review(which isn't public yet I don't think so can't link). And I do think OLED is overall better in most ways, being restricted to a small 1080p display with poor contrast is a high price to pay for 360hz, not one I'd be interested in that's for sure.
 
Yeah this is why LCD screens above 120hz are dumb. They can't actually transition that fast, it's all just marketing bullshit that leads to a blurry mess of overshoot.
My 240 Hz PG258Q with G-SYNC was clearly smoother and more responsive than my CX (and my multitude of other 120 Hz / 144 Hz / 165 Hz monitors). There's no comparison whatsoever in smoothness of mouse movement on the desktop and in FPS games where the angular velocity multiplies the speed of objects on-screen.
 
Yea, but at what cost? The Linus video shows the 360hz panel is a smeary mess in full motion, while the 120hz OLED is crisp and clear. I think we've hit the point of diminishing returns on LCD tech. Sure you can layer image over image over image, but you lose detail.
Without BFI, the CX looks just as bad to the eye as LCD monitors, if not worse due to the complete lack of smearing.
 
Without BFI, the CX looks just as bad to the eye as LCD monitors, if not worse due to the complete lack of smearing.

At 30 or maybe even 60fps, sure the OLED will probably look worst since there's no extra blurring to sort of blend the frames together. But I would argue a 120Hz OLED vs 120Hz LCD the OLED looks better. This is comparing my CX to my X27 both at 120Hz.
 
Well that’s not true at all. There are plenty of LCD panels that have fast enough response times to keep up with higher refresh rates than 120Hz. 240Hz is pretty common nowadays and even VA panels, traditionally the slowest, can keep up with that now on the new Samsung G7 screens. Pixels response times won’t be as fast as OLED certainly but those screens have a higher refresh rate than the OLED screens
That's the whole point. pixels on LCD monitors aren't transitioning fully in 4.17ms (unless you want a TN screen maybe...), so a 240hz, let alone 360hz refresh rate is all marketing. Sure the screen is trying, but all it's doing is blurring.
 
That's the whole point. pixels on LCD monitors aren't transitioning fully in 4.17ms (unless you want a TN screen maybe...), so a 240hz, let alone 360hz refresh rate is all marketing. Sure the screen is trying, but all it's doing is blurring.
This is just not true. The 360hz panel is 2.6ms g2g average which is plenty for 240hz, though some transitions are too slow for 360hz, but you still get some benefit.. The Samsung G7 is ~2.9ms, which is plenty for 240. There ARE some slow transitions that exceed the full transition time but that's not the same thing as "refresh rate is all marketing".
 
Last edited:
This is just not true. The 360hz panel is 2.6ms g2g average which is plenty for 240hz, though some transitions are too slow for 360hz, but you still get some benefit.. The Samsung G7 is ~2.9ms, which is plenty for 240. There ARE some slow transitions that exceed the full transition time but that's not the same thing as "refresh rate is all marketing".
Totally agree. Higher refresh rate definitely makes a difference even if not all the pixels fully transition.

It should be noted when they measure response times they typically measure until a percentage complete, like 90%. If they measued 100% complete transitions the numbers would be much, much higher. But 90%, or even if the pixel is only 10% transitioned it's better than 0% you would be at with a slower refresh rate.


But at equal refresh rates oled motion looks much cleaner, you're actually seeing the pixels you're supposed to each frame instead of half transitioned garbage.

It's also another reason people bragging about how color accurate their slow LCDs are is stupid for anything but still picture editing. If you throw in motion the color accuracy is laughable.
 
The video from Linus really demonstrates just how crazy fast OLED pixels are. I honestly think the only thing stopping LG from making 240 or 360hz 4K OLEDs is the fact that we don't have a display standard that can even come close to supporting the kind of speed required to do such a thing. It's fairly obvious, though, that OLED tech could handle faster pixel refreshes.

If LG can perfect inkjet printed OLEDs, we could see some really nice gaming monitors in the near future. If you think about it, a 48" 4K OLED could be a 24" 1080P OLED and still have the same pixel density.
 
The video from Linus really demonstrates just how crazy fast OLED pixels are. I honestly think the only thing stopping LG from making 240 or 360hz 4K OLEDs is the fact that we don't have a display standard that can even come close to supporting the kind of speed required to do such a thing. It's fairly obvious, though, that OLED tech could handle faster pixel refreshes.

If LG can perfect inkjet printed OLEDs, we could see some really nice gaming monitors in the near future. If you think about it, a 48" 4K OLED could be a 24" 1080P OLED and still have the same pixel density.

Wouldn't DSC allow us to hit 240Hz at 4k though? I believe DSC allows for 8k60 so in theory it should be able to do 4k240.
 
So I just disabled GSYNC and played a round of Overwatch on Ultra settings @ 4K120 4:4:4 10-bit using my 3080, and if I may just say.... OH. MY. GOD. The clarity in motion alone is stunning, but the fact that I'm averaging 160-180 FPS at Ultra settings is just... wow.

The CX baby. It doesn't get much better than this.
 
Wouldn't DSC allow us to hit 240Hz at 4k though? I believe DSC allows for 8k60 so in theory it should be able to do 4k240.

There is enough bandwidth to do 1080p@480hz. It isn't the pixel transitions holding them back. There might not be any real technological challenges to do even higher refresh rates. It might just be lack of motivation since only LG makes the panels and has no real competition.
 
At 30 or maybe even 60fps, sure the OLED will probably look worst since there's no extra blurring to sort of blend the frames together. But I would argue a 120Hz OLED vs 120Hz LCD the OLED looks better. This is comparing my CX to my X27 both at 120Hz.
I can compare my current OLED @1920x1080 120hz no VRR vs the Predator X38 3840x1600 with hardware GSync - the image motion on the predator is 3x times smoother and clearer than on the OLED. Maybe the VRR (Gsync) would shorten the gap. But with no VRR the difference is huge and not in favor of the OLED.
 
I can compare my current OLED @1920x1080 120hz no VRR vs the Predator X38 3840x1600 with hardware GSync - the image motion on the predator is 3x times smoother and clearer than on the OLED. Maybe the VRR (Gsync) would shorten the gap. But with no VRR the difference is huge and not in favor of the OLED.

LOL wut?? I mean the LG can run up to 175Hz or nearly a 50% increase in refresh rate over the CX so sure I can believe it delivers better sample and hold motion clarity in that case. My Omen X27 which is a 240Hz fast TN also beats my CX at 120Hz sample and hold. But 3x more clear? Yeah sounds like BS to me even my Omen isn't 3x more clear. Not a surprising claim from someone who has an obvious hard on for the Nano IPS panels I guess 🤣
 
Picking up a 55cx in a few days...I am pumped! Should push my 9900ks/rtx 2070 to the limit. Will report on my experience.

Can anyone recommend some dark, atmospheric single player games that look fantastic on the screen? It is halloween after all :).

I am planning on checking out all the amazing planet coaster custom parks on the steam workshop and also replaying some of the silent hill series...maybe some doom 3/tc's and REmakes.
 
LOL wut?? I mean the LG can run up to 175Hz or nearly a 50% increase in refresh rate over the CX so sure I can believe it delivers better sample and hold motion clarity in that case. My Omen X27 which is a 240Hz fast TN also beats my CX at 120Hz sample and hold. But 3x more clear? Yeah sounds like BS to me even my Omen isn't 3x more clear. Not a surprising claim from someone who has an obvious hard on for the Nano IPS panels I guess 🤣
My hard on certain things is definitely impressive, but displays is not one of them. Maybe it's not EXACTLY 3x times smoother, ffs I didn't measure. But the difference is huge none the less in favor of the Nano IPS. Just no contest, really. Sample and hold does its thing even to the fastest OELD pixels or whatever. The Predator was set to 144hz btw, I forgot to mention. No really, OLED with no VRR at 120hz simply sucks in comparison.
Add 1100+ dimming zones to the 38" LG panel, call it gsync ultimate and it will wipe the floor with the OLED TV all day and night in every contest possible. That's how it is.
 
My hard on certain things is definitely impressive, but displays is not one of them. Maybe it's not EXACTLY 3x times smoother, ffs I didn't measure. But the difference is huge none the less in favor of the Nano IPS. Just no contest, really. Sample and hold does its thing even to the fastest OELD pixels or whatever. The Predator was set to 144hz btw, I forgot to mention. No really, OLED with no VRR at 120hz simply sucks in comparison.
Add 1100+ dimming zones to the 38" LG panel, call it gsync ultimate and it will wipe the floor with the OLED TV all day and night in every contest possible. That's how it is.

Anything without VRR sucks whether it's OLED and IPS. And since you wanna play the make believe products game we can say the same thing about a CX. Give it a 240Hz/360Hz refresh rate along with Panasonic's heatsink implementation that allows OLED's to hit 1000 nits peak brightness and now what? OLED will stomp that IPS in every contest possible. Faster response times that make every bit of use out of 240Hz/360Hz, per pixel dimming with 1000 nits peak brightness WITHOUT SHITTY BLOOMING, the only last bastion left for IPS is that silly overexaggerated viewing angles argument.
 
Anything without VRR sucks whether it's OLED and IPS. And since you wanna play the make believe products game we can say the same thing about a CX. Give it a 240Hz/360Hz refresh rate along with Panasonic's heatsink implementation that allows OLED's to hit 1000 nits peak brightness and now what? OLED will stomp that IPS in every contest possible. Faster response times that make every bit of use out of 240Hz/360Hz, per pixel dimming with 1000 nits peak brightness WITHOUT SHITTY BLOOMING, the only last bastion left for IPS is that silly overexaggerated viewing angles argument.
No it won't because it will still have tempo burn in and if you unplug it from the wall socket the tempo may become the permo. The ahva-like viewing angles also are not going anywhere with 360hz. And concerning the blooming... shocking, but OLED has it too. Turn off the lights and set the black background, move the cursor around and you will see 3-5cm white blooming around it. Just like FALD, lol. Honestly I tested it yesterday after reading online that OLEDs have blooming too. It is not as severe as FALD blooming of course! I don't think you will notice it outside the all black background, but still.
In any case I do not want to pee on the OLED parade too much and I agree that it is the best display option for gaming for 2020 at least, considering the price, mind-blowing HDR performance and blacks without obvious blooming and overall image quality. My point is that without VRR - OLED sucks just like any LCD monitor in terms of image smoothness and clarity in motion in comparison to the modern 38" IPS with hardware g-sync module. On that we agree, it seems.

Edit: And the worst thing is the fucking size which is not going anywhere either.
 
Last edited:
No it won't because it will still have tempo burn in and if you unplug it from the wall socket the tempo may become the permo. The ahva-like viewing angles also are not going anywhere with 360hz. And concerning the blooming... shocking, but OLED has it too. Turn off the lights and set the black background, move the cursor around and you will see 3-5cm white blooming around it. Just like FALD, lol. Honestly I tested it yesterday after reading online that OLEDs have blooming too. It is not as severe as FALD blooming of course! I don't think you will notice it outside the all black background, but still.
In any case I do not want to pee on the OLED parade too much and I agree that it is the best display option for gaming for 2020 at least, considering the price, mind-blowing HDR performance and blacks without obvious blooming and overall image quality. My point is that without VRR - OLED sucks just like any LCD monitor in terms of image smoothness and clarity in motion in comparison to the modern 38" IPS with hardware g-sync module. On that we agree, it seems.

Edit: And the worst thing is the fucking size which is not going anywhere either.

Size is a completely subjective matter, the CX being no smaller than 48" isn't an advantage or disadvantage that's all personal preference. And HDR is a good point because as good as the GL950 is, it has no meaningful HDR at all which means moving forward it is going to get quickly outdated as more and more game developers get the hang of implementing HDR into their games.
 
Just like FALD, lol. Honestly I tested it yesterday after reading online that OLEDs have blooming too. It is not as severe as FALD blooming of course! I don't think you will notice it outside the all black background, but still.
Dude what are you talking about? OLEDs do not have any bloom. The way your eyes work when looking at a very bright object on a pitch dark background is not bloom. And it's nothing like a FALD. You have to be really confused or have some kind of eye problem to think that.
 
Yeah was about to say... Also the temporary burn-in (more accurately image retention) isn't a thing on every OLED panel. My CX doesn't have it (at least with my settings it doesn't, not running at full brightness all day). Rtings measured some (but it's probably hard to even see in real life) on their 48 but not 55. Apparently it varies from unit to unit.
 
Last edited:
Dude what are you talking about? OLEDs do not have any bloom. The way your eyes work when looking at a very bright object on a pitch dark background is not bloom. And it's nothing like a FALD. You have to be really confused or have some kind of eye problem to think that.
Exactly, this is the way the eyes see things specifics. I can't describe how exactly that works but it surely looks like fald halos )) Aaand I don't think it's only the eyes, I think it is also the inner reflections from the glass, that covers the OLED panel.
 
No it won't because it will still have tempo burn in and if you unplug it from the wall socket the tempo may become the permo. The ahva-like viewing angles also are not going anywhere with 360hz. And concerning the blooming... shocking, but OLED has it too. Turn off the lights and set the black background, move the cursor around and you will see 3-5cm white blooming around it. Just like FALD, lol. Honestly I tested it yesterday after reading online that OLEDs have blooming too. It is not as severe as FALD blooming of course! I don't think you will notice it outside the all black background, but still.
In any case I do not want to pee on the OLED parade too much and I agree that it is the best display option for gaming for 2020 at least, considering the price, mind-blowing HDR performance and blacks without obvious blooming and overall image quality. My point is that without VRR - OLED sucks just like any LCD monitor in terms of image smoothness and clarity in motion in comparison to the modern 38" IPS with hardware g-sync module. On that we agree, it seems.

Edit: And the worst thing is the fucking size which is not going anywhere either.
Except OLED does not have blooming, not in the way FALD backlights have. This demonstrates what FALD does and what you just won't see on an OLED thanks to per pixel local dimming:



What you are talking about is what happens if you turn on a flashlight in the dark. It appears very bright compared to turning it on in a room with some ambient lighting. It has more to do with how our eyes perceive it than anything that the OLED is doing.

I will give you the size, it's not all that practical but out of all the compromises currently available, it's at least something you can reasonably do something about - just put it a further away! Or use it like an ultrawide with a black background. I measured that if you use it at 3840x1600 (or the equivalent of that in terms of window sizes so you can run at full 4K) you have effectively a 43" ultrawide.

There is never a perfect display tech on the market but I really hope OLEDs start becoming available at smaller sizes. I would instantly go buy one if LG released a 120+ Hz OLED version of the 40" 5120x2160 panel they are planning.
 
Any area blooming you see on an OLED is because of how your eye takes in light. There is no actual blooming on an OLED panel.
 
Any area blooming you see on an OLED is because of how your eye takes in light. There is no actual blooming on an OLED panel.
This. I see "blooming" on my c9 but it is nothing like on a LCD. My eyes just suck. I don't find it distracting on a OLED but it doesn't annoy the shit out of me when I see the halo effect on LCDs. I never like FALD cause of it.
 
I think I found a mode that actually works, and I also suspect explains why some people can uncheck the "enable settings for the selected display".
If windows VRR is enabled, that probably kicks in when g-sync is turned off. and windows VRR actually seems to work perfectly. when you disable "enable settings for the selected display" I think you are turning g-sync off and letting windows VRR take over. That's probably why it has worked for some people, and others have just said nope, doesn't work whatsoever.
So to verify, I can turn off g-sync completely in nvcp (entirely uncheck "enable g-sync. g-sync compatible), and turn on VRR in windows, and it all works. I have left it that way for about an hour now, no tearing or stutter when capped to 118, 115, 110, 100 fps.

Full settings:
windows 10 pro 2004 - under display-> graphics settings: hardware accelerated gpu scheduling on, variable refresh rate on
OLED55CX6LA (european model, .26 firmware) - game mode, all processing off, instant game response on, amd freesync off
Clean install 456.71, global vsync-on, low latency mode: on, 3840x2160, 120Hz, 10bpc, rgb, full. g-sync unchecked altogether.

The green-button-spam window reports vrr on, but does not show the fluctuating refreshrate (whatever, it was broken and showed 5.5 hz anyway). Pendulum demo does not work, I assume since it specifically wants g-sync, and g-sync is technically off. It clearly works in games. I'm fully expecting it to break and stop working minutes after I type this, would just be typical of the cx behaviour :D
 
This is just not true. The 360hz panel is 2.6ms g2g average which is plenty for 240hz, though some transitions are too slow for 360hz, but you still get some benefit.. The Samsung G7 is ~2.9ms, which is plenty for 240. There ARE some slow transitions that exceed the full transition time but that's not the same thing as "refresh rate is all marketing".
I'll just note that g2g times tend to be "best case"; you don't have equal transition times between the entire color range.
 
Yes LG, please make the CXI with 240Hz. Will give me a perfect excuse to buy another one of your TV's next year. I am now a confirmed OLED addict and want more!
 
I think I found a mode that actually works, and I also suspect explains why some people can uncheck the "enable settings for the selected display".
If windows VRR is enabled, that probably kicks in when g-sync is turned off. and windows VRR actually seems to work perfectly. when you disable "enable settings for the selected display" I think you are turning g-sync off and letting windows VRR take over. That's probably why it has worked for some people, and others have just said nope, doesn't work whatsoever.
So to verify, I can turn off g-sync completely in nvcp (entirely uncheck "enable g-sync. g-sync compatible), and turn on VRR in windows, and it all works. I have left it that way for about an hour now, no tearing or stutter when capped to 118, 115, 110, 100 fps.

Full settings:
windows 10 pro 2004 - under display-> graphics settings: hardware accelerated gpu scheduling on, variable refresh rate on
OLED55CX6LA (european model, .26 firmware) - game mode, all processing off, instant game response on, amd freesync off
Clean install 456.71, global vsync-on, low latency mode: on, 3840x2160, 120Hz, 10bpc, rgb, full. g-sync unchecked altogether.

The green-button-spam window reports vrr on, but does not show the fluctuating refreshrate (whatever, it was broken and showed 5.5 hz anyway). Pendulum demo does not work, I assume since it specifically wants g-sync, and g-sync is technically off. It clearly works in games. I'm fully expecting it to break and stop working minutes after I type this, would just be typical of the cx behaviour :D
All the Windows setting should be doing is allowing Gsync/Freesync/HDMI-VRR(?) to work on older titles though; it shouldn't override anything as far as GPU specific settings go. You sure you're not running with just Vsync in this mode?
 
All the Windows setting should be doing is allowing Gsync/Freesync/HDMI-VRR(?) to work on older titles though; it shouldn't override anything as far as GPU specific settings go. You sure you're not running with just Vsync in this mode?
I am sure that I am running with v-sync on and as mentioned frame capped to 100, or 110, or 115 or 118, and all these framerates are smooth, tearing and stutter free.
 
Picking up a 55cx in a few days...I am pumped! Should push my 9900ks/rtx 2070 to the limit. Will report on my experience.

Can anyone recommend some dark, atmospheric single player games that look fantastic on the screen? It is halloween after all :).

I am planning on checking out all the amazing planet coaster custom parks on the steam workshop and also replaying some of the silent hill series...maybe some doom 3/tc's and REmakes.
Have you played Amnesia? Older game but it'll spook ya :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: t1k
like this
All the Windows setting should be doing is allowing Gsync/Freesync/HDMI-VRR(?) to work on older titles though; it shouldn't override anything as far as GPU specific settings go. You sure you're not running with just Vsync in this mode?
Ya, Windows VRR setting is just an override for Windows Store apps; they used to break Gsync/Freesync, and even though newer games play nice, older still don't. The VRR setting is essentially an override to allow Gsync to work in those old games

Windows VRR does *not* perform VRR on its own. It's solely a UWP compatibility tweak

The smoothness people see from turning off Gsync, or unchecked the "Enable settings" button... might just be the smoothness of high refresh gaming + Vsync. Which seems even smoother because of the jank that Gsync is currently exhibiting

Same goes for 4:4:4 8bit Gsync. Pretty sure it's still broken, but it's smoother than 10bit. The only confirmed non-stutter solution at all FPS I've seen on reddit and other forums is 4:2:0 8bit
 
Last edited:
Ya, Windows VRR setting is just an override for Windows Store apps; they used to break Gsync/Freesync, and even though newer games play nice, older still don't. The VRR setting is essentially an override to allow Gsync to work in those old games

Windows VRR does *not* perform VRR on its own. It's solely a UWP compatibility tweak

The smoothness people see from turning off Gsync, or unchecked the "Enable settings" button... might just be the smoothness of high refresh gaming + Vsync. Which seems even smoother because of the jank that Gsync is currently exhibiting
Nope, it 100% works, and nowhere in the setting itself does it state what you claim. frame limited 100 or 110 or 115 fps would've had stutter and/or tearing and it has absolutely none.
 
Nope, it 100% works, and nowhere in the setting itself does it state what you claim. frame limited 100 or 110 or 115 fps would've had stutter and/or tearing and it has absolutely none.
Windows might not say it, but Microsoft did

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/os-variable-refresh-rate/

This new OS support is only to augment these experiences and does not replace them. You should continue to use G-SYNC / FreeSync / Adaptive-Sync normally. This toggle doesn’t override any of the settings you’ve already configured in the G-SYNC, FreeSync, or Adaptive-Sync control panels.

This new toggle enables VRR support for DX11 full-screen games that did not support VRR natively, so these games can now benefit from your VRR hardware.
 
That was over a year ago on an older build. That's not what it says or does now.
16 months and one major windows build and several smaller windows builds ago, or so :D

I made a video, with a pattern that would easily show tearing. It is also perfectly smooth, but i guess thats hard to see in a 30fps video. 115 fps limit clearly visible + gsync off and 10bit full 120 4k.

 
That was over a year ago on an older build. That's not what it says or does now.

16 months and one major windows build and several smaller windows builds ago, or so :D
Vsync can remove tearing, and regular stutter is hard to notice with high fps on a high refresh rate monitor. Try disabling Vsync. If Gsync is still active, there will be no tearing at sub 120Hz

I'm not saying Microsoft didn't change how Windows VRR works, but come on; to imply they stealth changed it in a significant way is just a bad faith argument. In the absence of new information (and one which would fundamentally change how the feature worked), you go with what they published

Although at this point, optimistically hoping for a loophole is all we've got while we wait for LG
 
Nope, it 100% works, and nowhere in the setting itself does it state what you claim. frame limited 100 or 110 or 115 fps would've had stutter and/or tearing and it has absolutely none.
You need to test that with a game that can not deliver constant 100+ fps. *constant* limited fps will almost never induce stutter or tearing. Even with g-sync and/or vsync off.
 
Vsync can remove tearing, and regular stutter is hard to notice with high fps on a high refresh rate monitor. Try disabling Vsync. If Gsync is still active, there will be no tearing at sub 120Hz

I'm not saying Microsoft didn't change how Windows VRR works, but come on; to imply they stealth changed it in a significant way is just a bad faith argument. In the absence of new information (and one which would fundamentally change how the feature worked), you go with what they published

Although at this point, optimistically hoping for a loophole is all we've got while we wait for LG
Vsync can't to my knowledge do large range vrr, no. Very few would ever have bought a single g-sync monitor then.
But i tried to disable v-sync, and that changes the mode from VRR to fixed and hides the VRR option in windows (and to even turn VRR back on again, g-sync needs to be turned on first), so v-sync is either a dependency, or by some strange magic the windows VRR keeps g-sync alive after it is disabled, but without glitching.

Further things that point to it truely working:
*BFI (truemotion) is grayed out, if it was just v-sync, it should be possible to enable.
*Also consider what's more likely, than an option called VRR does VRR; or nvidia stealth-adding VRR to v-sync without mentioning it?
*green button spam says VRR
 
Last edited:
Back
Top