• 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.

NVIDIA Introduces G-SYNC Technology

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Solving the decades-old problem of onscreen tearing, stuttering and lag, NVIDIA today unveiled NVIDIA G-SYNC™ technology which, for the first time, enables perfect synchronization between the GPU and the display. NVIDIA G-SYNC technology eliminates tears, stutters and lag in gaming monitors. The result is consistently smooth frame rates and ultrafast response not possible with previous display technologies. Several years in the making, G-SYNC™ technology synchronizes the monitor's refresh rate to the GPU's render rate, so images display the moment they are rendered. Scenes appear instantly. Objects are sharper. Game play is smoother.

"Our commitment to create a pure gaming experience led us to G-SYNC," said Jeff Fisher, senior vice president of the GeForce business unit at NVIDIA. "This revolutionary technology eliminates artifacts that have long stood between gamers and the game. Once you play on a G-SYNC monitor, you'll never want to go back."
 
Posted this at guru when I heard this, and I'll share my thoughts here too:

Thank **** this issue is finally getting more attention. As long as this doesn't have any significant downsides, I will be upgrading to have this.

I ALWAYS use vsync as tearing and stuttering are the bane of my enjoyment. Even with vsync I noticed this issue and had given up hope there might ever be some solution. My goal the past generation has been 60fps @ 1080p and seeing drops into the 40s and 50s which should have been ok, have been agonizing. I thought I was going crazy, but this just confirms the issue with the technology at present.

This is a step in the right direction and I am sold. I just really hope this isn't a software limited technology like the crap from Lucid. Good ideas ruined by crappy software and no development support.
 
Call me stupid, but didn't nVidia already have some kind of refresh rate control to fix tearing years ago?
 
wasteomind said:
Adaptive vsync was more of a band aide rather than a solution.
Click to expand...

And I gotta say adaptive v-sync has been great, ive been tearing-free in BF3 and other games for a long time now. So if they're improving on that then it's just icing, way to go in any case. Love my NV
 
This is going to be great, folks. I'm excited after only reading the Anandtech article. Cannot wait.
 
Nice!

When I get my 2nd GeForce GTX 670 Windforce in a year...should be good to go with my ASUS VG248QE Black 24" 3D monitor.
 
Did this come out of nowhere? Awesome.

And an official "DIY solution" for the ASUS VG248QE.
 
DPI said:
And I gotta say adaptive v-sync has been great, ive been tearing-free in BF3 and other games for a long time now. So if they're improving on that then it's just icing, way to go in any case. Love my NV
Click to expand...

Adaptive vsync is terrible for me because frames below the refresh rate are still subject to tearing. One small dip can be ruinous. It was intended more as a fix for input lag in low fps situations.
 
I gotta hand it to NVidia, they really do a fair bit of innovating and risk taking.

Which again has me worried for AMD. This could be a trump card feature for hard core gamers. AMD will lose more customers to NVidia.
 
I wonder if Gsync is "too successful" it might be a problem for Nvidia. Hear me out before you say, nah you're off you rocker! Suppose Gsync is so good that playing at 40fps is butter smooth. Why will gamers need to purchase expensive enthusiat cards when cheaper mid-range ones will suffice? Nvidia could stand to loose quite a bit of $$$
 
I just bought a damn monitor. This better be available in a future VA panel.
 
Nvidia_ATI said:
I wonder if Gsync is "too successful" it might be a problem for Nvidia. Hear me out before you say, nah you're off you rocker! Suppose Gsync is so good that playing at 40fps is butter smooth. Why will gamers need to purchase expensive enthusiat cards when cheaper mid-range ones will suffice? Nvidia could stand to loose quite a bit of $$$
Click to expand...

Your crosshair/cursor will still be updated 3 times more frequently with 120fps than with 40.

And you have to pay Nvidia to get monitor with G-SYNC anyway
 
DPI said:
And I gotta say adaptive v-sync has been great, ive been tearing-free in BF3 and other games for a long time now. So if they're improving on that then it's just icing, way to go in any case. Love my NV
Click to expand...
If you never drop below the refresh rate, then you don't really gain anything from adaptive vsync: it just behaves like regular vsync. And if you do, then you can't have been tear-free, as tearing will occur at any interval above or below the refresh rate.
 
wasteomind said:
Adaptive vsync is terrible for me because frames below the refresh rate are still subject to tearing.
Click to expand...
That's the entire point of adaptive V-Sync... V-Sync is only enabled when your hardware can keep up.

If you want V-Sync on at all times, then use regular V-Sync.

wasteomind said:
One small dip can be ruinous. It was intended more as a fix for input lag in low fps situations.
Click to expand...
Could also just use regular V-Sync and enable triple-buffering.
 
Michaelius said:
And you have to pay Nvidia to get monitor with G-SYNC anyway
Click to expand...

If G-SYNC gets adopted by the major display manufacturers then nVidia's gonna be smiling all the way to the bank. I wonder if AMD will come up with an equivalent solution, and display manufacturers will then have to add both an N-SYNC and G-SYNC chips into their monitors :p
 
Snowdog said:
I gotta hand it to NVidia, they really do a fair bit of innovating and risk taking.

Which again has me worried for AMD. This could be a trump card feature for hard core gamers. AMD will lose more customers to NVidia.
Click to expand...
Yup this worries me a well. I wonder if monitor makers are going to drag their feet with this inevitable licensing fee and feature locking technology. I like it, but I'm skeptical of it being widely used in the affordable market.
 
maxius said:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...GSYNC2_PB_Quadro_G_Sync_Add_on_Interface.html
looks like they took gsync idea right out the enterprise market and plopped it in the consumer as new

http://www.nvidia.com/docs/IO/40049/Quadro_GSync_install_guide_v4.pdf
its been the enterprise space since 11

do i get a cookie?
Click to expand...
The G-Sync device you've linked is for synchronizing the graphics card to an external source.

The G-Sync tech Nvidia is promoting has the graphics card itself acting as a sync source, to which "G-Sync" monitors can synchronize with.

Basically, this new tech works in the opposite direction.
 
Trimlock said:
Yup this worries me a well. I wonder if monitor makers are going to drag their feet with this inevitable licensing fee and feature locking technology.
Click to expand...
Display vendors dragging their feet is a simple inevitability. After all, it took a number of years before they decided that pushing more-than-capable panels past 60 Hz might be a valuable thing to do.
 
mach1.9pants said:
So will old NV cards work with it - driver based? Or does this mean new cards AND new monitor?
Click to expand...

From Engadget: "... the module works with GPUs that have Kepler architecture (so the GTX 660 and up). G-Sync monitors will be available starting in Q1 2014."

http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/18/nvidia-g-sync/

And, only these manufacturers so far: ASUS, BenQ, Philips and ViewSonic.

Do not expect this to support ANY AMD video card and ANY non-Kepler GPU lower than a GTX 660.
 
It uses display port, so knowing that its then obvious why it cannot work on <600 series. See anandtech's article.
 
Nvidia_ATI said:
I wonder if Gsync is "too successful" it might be a problem for Nvidia. Hear me out before you say, nah you're off you rocker! Suppose Gsync is so good that playing at 40fps is butter smooth. Why will gamers need to purchase expensive enthusiat cards when cheaper mid-range ones will suffice? Nvidia could stand to loose quite a bit of $$$
Click to expand...

They will still be selling you Gsync monitors. :p
 
octoberasian said:
From Engadget: "... the module works with GPUs that have Kepler architecture (so the GTX 660 and up). G-Sync monitors will be available starting in Q1 2014."

http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/18/nvidia-g-sync/

And, only these manufacturers so far: ASUS, BenQ, Philips and ViewSonic.

Do not expect this to support ANY AMD video card and ANY non-Kepler GPU lower than a GTX 660.
Click to expand...

It's actually the GTX 650 Ti Boost and up, not GTX 660 and up. Not your fault - some of the news websites are confused about this, but here's Nvidia's statement on requirements:

"All it takes is a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost or better GPU, and a NVIDIA G-SYNC enabled monitor"

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/ar...evolutionary-ultra-smooth-stutter-free-gaming
 
This is huge. Definitely going to be looking for a new monitor with this tech.
 
f you haven't seen Anand's post about it, it gives a pretty good overview without going into whitepaper level of technical miniutiae. He was actually at NVIDIA's live demonstration so he saw it first hand, and concluded his article with "I can't stress enough just how smooth the G-Sync experience was, it's a game changer."

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7436/n...via-smoothness

The takeaway for me is that an investment in a G-SYNC compatible monitor is a hedge against not having to upgrade video cards as often, since its essentially a "dynamic refresh rate" system, meaning the monitor and GPU will always be perfectly in sync, and if framerate dips down into the 50's, or 40's or even 30's its going to be essentially imperceptible. Drops in frame rate no longer have to be drops in smoothness. Game devs relying on the presence of G-Sync can throw higher quality effects at a scene since they don't need to be as afraid of drops in frame rate excursions below 60 fps.

As things are now, traditional monitors are fixed at 30Hz, 60Hz, 120Hz and as everyone has seen when a GPU can't render fast enough to feed one of the fixed rates, we get jarring stuttering, tearing, input lag.

Bottom line: perfect smoothness in every game without V-Sync input lag.
 
Nvidia_ATI said:
I wonder if Gsync is "too successful" it might be a problem for Nvidia. Hear me out before you say, nah you're off you rocker! Suppose Gsync is so good that playing at 40fps is butter smooth. Why will gamers need to purchase expensive enthusiat cards when cheaper mid-range ones will suffice? Nvidia could stand to loose quite a bit of $$$
Click to expand...

40fps no matter how consistent is never going to be as smooth as 120fps. People will always want more power, if they don't care about FPS they will apply the power to increase graphics settings.
 
rudy said:
40fps no matter how consistent is never going to be as smooth as 120fps. People will always want more power, if they don't care about FPS they will apply the power to increase graphics settings.
Click to expand...

It won't be nearly as demanded however, since those who wanted to attain maximum FPS is because that's how you achieved it. If this can take off, I can see it lessening the demand for high end equipment.
 
I don't believe you, many people claimed that 30fps was plenty. But it never stopped the march of progress forward. The people who care about high frame rates for games are not going to accept 40fps, if they did than 60 or 30 would have been fine for them. The demand will not change significantly. You have people who accept low FPS and always have, you have people who do not accept it and never will and then you have a small group of people who obsess over screen tearing etc... OK these people might drop a card but that's about it.

Light boosted 120fps will continue to gain traction as the gold standard for anyone who cares about performance.
 
rudy said:
I don't believe you, many people claimed that 30fps was plenty. But it never stopped the march of progress forward. The people who care about high frame rates for games are not going to accept 40fps, if they did than 60 or 30 would have been fine for them. The demand will not change significantly. You have people who accept low FPS and always have, you have people who do not accept it and never will and then you have a small group of people who obsess over screen tearing etc... OK these people might drop a card but that's about it.

Light boosted 120fps will continue to gain traction as the gold standard for anyone who cares about performance.
Click to expand...

You are comparing people who demanded more frames when we didn't even have adaptive v-sync. G-Sync is removing the need to have maximum FPS at all times to have a smooth experience.
 
DPI said:
f you haven't seen Anand's post about it, it gives a pretty good overview without going into whitepaper level of technical miniutiae. He was actually at NVIDIA's live demonstration so he saw it first hand, and concluded his article with "I can't stress enough just how smooth the G-Sync experience was, it's a game changer."

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7436/n...via-smoothness

The takeaway for me is that an investment in a G-SYNC compatible monitor is a hedge against not having to upgrade video cards as often, since its essentially a "dynamic refresh rate" system, meaning the monitor and GPU will always be perfectly in sync, and if framerate dips down into the 50's, or 40's or even 30's its going to be essentially imperceptible. Drops in frame rate no longer have to be drops in smoothness. Game devs relying on the presence of G-Sync can throw higher quality effects at a scene since they don't need to be as afraid of drops in frame rate excursions below 60 fps.

As things are now, traditional monitors are fixed at 30Hz, 60Hz, 120Hz and as everyone has seen when a GPU can't render fast enough to feed one of the fixed rates, we get jarring stuttering, tearing, input lag.

Bottom line: perfect smoothness in every game without V-Sync input lag.
Click to expand...


It's about time, really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top