why vsync is a problem?

S

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,765
As title.
never seen a single problem running vsync on all my games.

If my SLI is able to push games at more than 60FPS I save energy and money, if my SLI isn't able to push games at 60FPS is runs without tearing at whatever the framerate my sli is able.

I played crysis 3 with vsync on at 40/50FPS without any drop to the famous 30FPS like advertised from other people. so what is the point?
never seen a framerate drop to 30FPS also before the nvidia adaptive vsync.
 
When fraps displays 50fps thats how many frames are being created and would be shown with v-sync off. With v-sync on your display would only show 30 of those if using a 60hz monitor or 40fps if you were using a 120hz monitor.
 
It never dropped, you have been playing at a rock steady 30fps.
Which is perfectly fine for many, if not most, people in that game.
 
If your framerate isnt the same as the refresh rate of the display, you get tiny to larger lags and the image fluidity can look jerky.
Also rapid changes in framerate cause different time lags to occur that make it look jerky too.
This is fixed with Gsync.

If you dont notice any issues, fair enough, some displays dont look so bad and some people dont see it much.
Twitch gamers notice the lag.
 
Exactly you just use whats best for you. I use v-sync off and a fps cap on my 120hz monitor as i dont like any form of v-sync, i try to minimize the amount of lag and low refresh monitors strain my eyes. Just test all the methods available and choose what you like best.
 
I really like Adaptive V-Sync, especially using a 120hz monitor.

I get V-Sync when I can maintain 120hz, and V-Sync is automatically disabled any time the FPS dips below that. I consider that to be the best of both worlds.
 
GotNoRice said:
I really like Adaptive V-Sync, especially using a 120hz monitor.

I get V-Sync when I can maintain 120hz, and V-Sync is automatically disabled any time the FPS dips below that. I consider that to be the best of both worlds.
Click to expand...

but adaptive vsync is not the best solution since tearing appears on low framerate also.
imho vsync on everytime an no problem with modern games, triple buffer is the solution to the 30fps cap and stuttering?
don't make me laugh, who ever seen stuttering at 40/50FPS.
if you go under 40FPS we cannot call this stuttering but low framerate, so you don't need a gync monitor but a greater GPU.
 
sblantipodi said:
don't make me laugh, who ever seen stuttering at 40/50FPS.
Click to expand...

If the framerate jumps up and down a fair bit even staying within 40 to 60fps, it can look jerky.
This is because you notice the change in lag time between subsequent frames.
If the lag time remains fairly constant (as with fairly constant framerate) you probably wont notice.
 
sblantipodi said:
but adaptive vsync is not the best solution since tearing appears on low framerate also.
Click to expand...

It is for me, because if I can't maintain FPS equal to my refresh rate, tearing is the lesser evil at that point; I want every last frame possible. I guess it's a matter of preference and what factors you consider the most important.
 
GotNoRice said:
It is for me, because if I can't maintain FPS equal to my refresh rate, tearing is the lesser evil at that point; I want every last frame possible. I guess it's a matter of preference and what factors you consider the most important.
Click to expand...

40FPS without tearing for me is far better than 50 with tearing but you are right,
its probably a question of taste
 
be happy you are oblivious to the stuttering and sluggishness of dropping below refresh rate with vsync on. if you are dropping below 60 fps with vsync on without trible buffering then yes you will be hitting 30 fps for most of the time regardless of what the frame counter says. all you have to do is record frametimes to see that.
 
The mouse lag in some games using VSYNC is really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really bad.
 
I notice some input lag with vsync on, so I typically leave it off when I'm playing multiplayer FPS' since every millisecond counts. I use it for slower paced games and/or single player games. Screen tearing hasn't bothered me much. I do use a frame rate cap on some games where I don't want the input lag if vsync and have sky high fps to reduce heat, power consumption and noise. No need to processes frames that I'm not feeling a benefit from.
 
As soon as your frame rate is not equal or a multiple or a fraction of your refresh rate, the display is NOT smooth, because of dropped or repeated frames - vsync isn't even a factor here, it only seeks to address the issue of screen tearing. Before even talking about input lag or the performance impact of vsync, you need to understand that.

The stuttering/jerkiness we are talking about here has nothing to do with high or low framerate, it has to do with framerate being incompatible with your display refresh rate.
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised it took so many posts before mouse input lag came up. The titles I've tried vsync with resulted in an awful rubber-band effect. Vsync off + frame cap seems to work great though.
 
OMG, you sblantipodi are truly clueless... :(

60Hz + V-Sync is crap as it produces a lot of input lag in games that are programmed properly and a lot more in others and other issues with that (thankfully there are utilities like D3DOverrider to adress those). And even if game uses tripple buffering there is still sharp difference between perfectly synced framerate and even one fps less

also 60Hz in general is crappy refresh rate, at around 100Hz input lag becomes hardly noticeable, much less than on 60Hz even when running below 60fps and this is real benefit of high refresh rate monitors and G-Sync will be even better than that! :eek:

If u like your lagging SLI, lagging monitor (best case scenario it have 16ms, worst case 32ms and most probably around 24fps) and super uber ultra crappy v-synced 60Hz then just use it and don't suggest it is ennough for everyone cause it isn't even close...

if you were ranting that G-Sync is not needed because 120Hz+LightBoost is ennough it would at least have some sense to it :eek:
 
xorbe said:
I'm surprised it took so many posts before mouse input lag came up. The titles I've tried vsync with resulted in an awful rubber-band effect. Vsync off + frame cap seems to work great though.
Click to expand...
A frame limiter may in some cases increase input latency (though in a slightly different way) if the engine ties its main loop in which input is polled to the rate of its renderer. Not by any Earth-shattering amount if you're at 60 Hz, but it is a possibility in some cases.
 
XoR said:
OMG, you sblantipodi are truly clueless... :(

60Hz + V-Sync is crap as it produces a lot of input lag in games that are programmed properly and a lot more in others and other issues with that (thankfully there are utilities like D3DOverrider to adress those). And even if game uses tripple buffering there is still sharp difference between perfectly synced framerate and even one fps less

also 60Hz in general is crappy refresh rate, at around 100Hz input lag becomes hardly noticeable, much less than on 60Hz even when running below 60fps and this is real benefit of high refresh rate monitors and G-Sync will be even better than that! :eek:

If u like your lagging SLI, lagging monitor (best case scenario it have 16ms, worst case 32ms and most probably around 24fps) and super uber ultra crappy v-synced 60Hz then just use it and don't suggest it is ennough for everyone cause it isn't even close...

if you were ranting that G-Sync is not needed because 120Hz+LightBoost is ennough it would at least have some sense to it :eek:
Click to expand...

As I suggested before it is really funny that a person with a CPU that chokes the GPU can talk about input lag, trying to convince us that he knows what he says.
Personally I see no added input lag from 60Hz to 120Hz, I'm not a superman and people who can see this difference is really really rare.
Most people who says the opposite says it just to talk, scientifically people who can see the difference are a wide minority.
 
Before this turns into a slagging match why did you start this thread if you are happy with your setup ?

Going from 60hz to 120hz is amazing for me. I used to suffer from eye strain which would lead onto headaches if i use the pc for too long. Since getting a 120hz monitor i no longer get that and will never buy a 60hz monitor again. I also dont use vsync as i hate the weird stutter it gives. My setup is perfect for me and i don't care what other people think as they aren't the ones using it. Once again what was the point of this thread :)
 
bytes said:
Before this turns into a slagging match why did you start this thread if you are happy with your setup ?

Going from 60hz to 120hz is amazing for me. I used to suffer from eye strain which would lead onto headaches if i use the pc for too long. Since getting a 120hz monitor i no longer get that and will never buy a 60hz monitor again. I also dont use vsync as i hate the weird stutter it gives. My setup is perfect for me and i don't care what other people think as they aren't the ones using it. Once again what was the point of this thread :)
Click to expand...

just to know how much people thinks to see a stutter that not exist or that in most cases is generated by other components than 60Hz monitor or vsync.
 
I can't handle screen tearing. It bothers the hell out of me to the point that I just can't play without it.
Vsync and the FPS limiter in Afterburner have been great for me.
 
sblantipodi said:
just to know how much people thinks to see a stutter that not exist or that in most cases is generated by other components than 60Hz monitor or vsync.
Click to expand...

WOW, its amazing you can see with other peoples eyes :D

JayJapanB said:
Going from 120hz tn to 60hz ips was amazing for me.
Click to expand...

My brother has seen my 120hz screen and says the same that he will stick with 60hz as he prefers the better viewing angles and colours.
 
JayJapanB said:
Going from 120hz tn to 60hz ips was amazing for me.
Click to expand...

you are clearly someone who talks because tryed both monitors.
most users switch from a supermarket 60Hz TN to a newer supermarket 120Hz TN and says:"miracle".
it is no miracle in 120Hz, it is a newer supermarket monitors.

quality monitors never had big problems, newer quality monitors had less problems also.
 
sblantipodi said:
you are clearly someone who talks because tryed both monitors.
most users switch from a supermarket 60Hz TN to a newer supermarket 120Hz TN and says:"miracle".
it is no miracle in 120Hz, it is a newer supermarket monitors.

quality monitors never had big problems, newer quality monitors had less problems also.
Click to expand...
you really don't make a whole lot of sense and just starting this thread alone proves that.
 
sblantipodi said:
just to know how much people thinks to see a stutter that not exist or that in most cases is generated by other components than 60Hz monitor or vsync.
Click to expand...

In other words, you think because you don't notice it, none exist and you created this thread to try and convince everyone that their eyes are liars and to adopt your opinion because your eyes tell the truth?
 
sblantipodi said:
As I suggested before it is really funny that a person with a CPU that chokes the GPU can talk about input lag, trying to convince us that he knows what he says.
Click to expand...
Not+Sure+if+serious.jpg


Personally I see no added input lag from 60Hz to 120Hz, I'm not a superman and people who can see this difference is really really rare.
Most people who says the opposite says it just to talk, scientifically people who can see the difference are a wide minority.
Click to expand...
if you don't see input lag then why this topic? to prove to people who see it that there is no input lag at 60Hz? if you don't see it then what is your method of evaluating it?

or is this topic just to show that you are bigger ignorant that your post from G-Sync topic suggested?

quality monitors never had big problems, newer quality monitors had less problems also.
Click to expand...
it is opposite, actually quality monitors always had problems with blurring and input lag and being locked at 60Hz

cheap TN monitors always had cheap scalers that did very simple scaling in real-time without much input-lag and were almost always overclockable to 75Hz, not to mention TN panels are much faster than IPS and especially VA

your monitor have 18ms input lag, is locked at 60Hz and have panel that is not very fast. It also have strong override artifacts. Not my first choice for gaming ;)
 
XoR said:
or is this topic just to show that you are bigger ignorant that your post from G-Sync topic suggested?
cheap TN monitors always had cheap scalers that did very simple scaling in real-time without much input-lag and were almost always overclockable to 75Hz, not to mention TN panels are much faster than IPS and especially VA
Click to expand...

Scaling? do you have a minimal idea of what is a scaler?
Obviously not.
If you play at native resolution no scaling occurs, thanks for the ignorant but I have done my homework, and you?
 
monitor with scaler will 'download' frame to memory instead of drawing it, perform scale to match resolution and draw from memory at 16,6ms. If resolution is 'native' it may skip scaling process and save few miliseconds but whole 16.6ms it took to fill memory buffer is added to input lag anyway

monitor without scaler will draw frame as it gets it from graphics card according to timings it is synced to so no real input lag, just panel reaction time. Because no fixed timings such monitors often accept overclocking. That doesn't mean such monitors doesn't scale image, it does and frankly with better results than professional scalers, especially very low resolutions like 640x480, 800x600 look much better on cheap TNs than expensive professional monitors that just overdo things

process of scaling on expensive monitors doesn't take long. Even color space transformations on real good monitors doesn't take that much time overall. Mostly it's filling memory buffer that adds lag.

Some S-PVA also add another frame to improve on RTC performance by 'pre-tilting' crystals when transactions from black to other brightness level are made. Your EIZO have 18ms lag so it obviously doesn't do that. 16.6ms from getting frame to memory and rest 1.4ms is most probably from reaction time alone

Clarify anything else? :)
 
V-Sync is a problem because it introduces both lag and 'stuttering' output at the same time.

G-Sync fixes the problem by making the monitor wait instead of making the GPU wait- so no lag, and frames are displayed as they're rendered.

G-Sync keeps us from having to choose between a more responsive system and a system without tearing.
 
Vsync introduces latency and limits the potential of your machine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top