• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD Freesync Monitors & Reviews Thread

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Because PCPer didnt test the pixel response time of the panel. They captured a 120Hz video of the three monitors running at 45Hz/55Hz.

You wont see any Ghosting on the Swift because the monitor is much faster than the 22,2ms refresh time of the pixel. So the reason why the BenQ and the LG showed more ghosting is for same reason that the electronic isnt able to refresh the pixel fast enough with AdaptiveSync.
 
cmdrdredd said:
In my opinion I think waiting another year is a good idea on these.
Click to expand...

I think so too. If we set aside G-Sync and FreeSync for a moment, can anyone in this thread point to a 10/10 4K PC gaming monitor? Has there ever been a non-TN 4K monitor that's as fast for ghosting as the ROG Swift? Is there any great 4K G-Sync non-TN gaming monitor 28", 31.5-37"?

We know that the Swift is one of the fastest, if not the fastest but because it's a TN panel, it has its own inherent limitations. It doesn't make sense to compare a 4K IPS/PVA panel or a 21:9 panel to the Swift for competitive FPS gaming. It makes no sense to compare GSync vs. FreeSync and ignore the the underlying technologies in the panels themselves.

The biggest issue for G-Sync was lack or large sized IPS/PVA 4K panels. Pretty much almost all G-Sync monitors until now were junky TN types, with Swift being one of the few outstanding standouts. As was already mentioned in this thread, just because a monitor has GSync or FreeSync, doesn't mean the actual panel driving it is great.

GSync/FreeSync aside, the problem is we just don't have affordable + excellent 4K IPS monitors. If you go 21:9 route, the types of panels used in those displays are never going to be as fast as the Swift; so one must understand the pros/cons of those monitors, regardless of GSync vs. FreeSync. Yet, this thread has basically turned into ROG Swift's lack of ghosting vs. everyone else. I just don't see how someone interested in the 1440p 27" Swift would be cross-shopping a 34" 21:9 or a 32" or larger 4K IPS/PVA panel. These 3 monitor types are aimed at different usage patterns.

Since this is just the first wave of FreeSync monitors, it looks like the monitor manufacturers haven't figured out yet how to drop the minimum refresh rate below 40-48Hz. As a result, it makes sense to wait for higher quality panels with lower refresh rates, and specifically for higher quality 4K and 21:9 panels.

Even the 21:9 34" LG looks gimped vs. the 34UM95 that has 3440x1440 resolution.

95i.jpg
 
Last edited:
Silverforce11 said:
Interesting, why such discrepancies compared with PCPer?
Click to expand...

NVPer is basically NV's PR mouthpiece. Pretending to develop an app to test multi gpus (FCAT) to demonstrate how bad 7970 crossfire was, while not adhering to the same comprehensive testing on the 970/980 or any other current NV gpu since they no longer have the advantage (seemingly have a disadvantage now against XDMA). Sure they tested a few games eventually on 980 sli but they have never put any focus on FCAT since they couldn't use it to demonstrate anything good for NV.

You only have to watch a few reviews from Ryan to see him giving the benefit of doubt for any flaws NV has while nitpicking any AMD flaw he can find. Objectivity is not the focus of NVPer.
 
sontin said:
Because PCPer didnt test the pixel response time of the panel. They captured a 120Hz video of the three monitors running at 45Hz/55Hz.

You wont see any Ghosting on the Swift because the monitor is much faster than the 22,2ms refresh time of the pixel. So the reason why the BenQ and the LG showed more ghosting is for same reason that the electronic isnt able to refresh the pixel fast enough with AdaptiveSync.
Click to expand...

So why do other reviewers see ghosting on the Swift when its running an even higher 60 fps vs 45?
 
wand3r3r said:
NVPer is basically NV's PR mouthpiece. Pretending to develop an app to test multi gpus (FCAT) to demonstrate how bad 7970 crossfire was, while not adhering to the same comprehensive testing on the 970/980 or any other current NV gpu since they no longer have the advantage (seemingly have a disadvantage now against XDMA). Sure they tested a few games eventually on 980 sli but they have never put any focus on FCAT since they couldn't use it to demonstrate anything good for NV.

You only have to watch a few reviews from Ryan to see him giving the benefit of doubt for any flaws NV has while nitpicking any AMD flaw he can find. Objectivity is not the focus of NVPer.
Click to expand...

I'm aware of their bias, but I am giving them benefit of doubt.
 
sontin said:
Can you explain this?
TFTCentral doesnt show any huge Ghosting at 60Hz:
pursuit_1.jpg

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/acer_xb270hu.htm
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? I'm seeing one frame ghosting and blurring in the pictures of the aliens...

Even with Overdrive & ULMB on. In fact its quite blurry without ULMB on.

GN3zk9S.jpg


C91jVQA.jpg


The lower the frame rate the worse it is.
PCPER thinks their TN in the SWIFT has no blur nor ghosting at 45 fps..

Seriously I take these guy's empirical data and their demonstrated expertise than PCPER with an iPhone 6 video.

Clearly there's ghosting/blurring even at 100 hz:
xUp6eQ4.jpg
 
Last edited:
You see Ghosting with ULMB because the pixel response isnt fast enough to switch. But this is a problem on every display except OLED and Plasma.

It has nothing to do with PCPer findings.
 
NeoLuxembourg said:
You can't compare the UM67 to the UM95, it's not the same family of monitors.

Compare it to the UM65 that was also 2560 x 1080.

Maybe LG will release an 34UM97, but nothing about that for now.
Click to expand...

Ya, you are right. That's my point though. The 11 FreeSync monitors unveiled so far is not some final/exhaustive list. Instead, this is just the beginning. In nearly 2 years since GSync came out, NV managed to get out less than 10 monitors, right? This thread has basically turned into ROG Swift > any FreeSync monitor which isn't unexpected.

The point is someone like myself shopping for a 32"+ 4K IPS/PVA monitor wouldn't even consider the 27" 2560x1440 TN Swift. So these comparisons of ROG Swift's lack of ghosting vs. other monitors in the world is way less relevant for those of us who are not competitive gamers. If someone is that hardcore of a competitive gamer (plays in leagues/for $/rankings) well chances they already own the Swift. This thread is not really for them. However, I would very much like 4K, awesome colours and viewing angles but no way will I buy a monitor 24-27" in size as that's too small for me.

As of July 2014, Bit-Tech found that the best gaming monitor by some margin was the Eizo Foris FG2421. Today this monitor retails for nearly $600 USD on Amazon. The thing is many of us would never buy a 23.5-24" monitor, no matter how good it is. Even if this monitor was $300, I still wouldn't buy it. That's the point when someone tries to compare the Swift ROG to "everything else" out there, it misses the point that different consumers have different needs. A lot of gamers who mostly play single-player FPS/3rd person/strategy games would accept some ghosting for other benefits of a 4K IPS/34" 3440x1440 21:9 monitor.

Sooner or later someone will make a great large sized 4K FreeSync/GSync monitor, but until now no one made a great GSync monitor of that kind. For that reason, the ROG Swift is not some holly grail of PC monitors for everyone.
 
Last edited:
RussianSensation said:
The point is someone like myself shopping for a 32"+ 4K IPS/PVA monitor wouldn't even consider the 27" 2560x1440 TN Swift. So these comparisons of ROG Swift's lack of ghosting vs. other monitors in the world is way less relevant for those of us who are not competitive gamers. If someone is that hardcore of a competitive gamer (plays in leagues/for $, etc., well they already own the Swift). However, I would very much like 4K and awesome colours and viewing angles. Sooner or later someone will make a great 4K large sized FreeSync/GSync monitor but until now no one made a GSync monitor of that kind.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I'd love the Swift's motion clarity, but that's not my priority. My absolute number one priority is getting a 3440x1440 IPS, preferably with LG's window management software or equivalent, because that's a really good screen and resolution for gaming, but equally important to me is the absolute best bar none option for everything else I use a computer for. And rather than wanting the proest MLG superclear motion screen with sacrifices for all other use, I want the best monitor overall for all my use, and that means that it has to be the things I won't compromise on and then I'll look for the best gaming performance within those constraints.
 
LG 29UM67 29" Reviews

http://www.4gamer.net/games/295/G029549/20150319126/

AMD独自のディスプレイ同期技術「FreeSync」を試す。“G-SYNCキラー”の完成度やいかに？
 
Last edited:
Silverforce11 said:
So why do other reviewers see ghosting on the Swift when its running an even higher 60 fps vs 45?
Click to expand...

Pcper glosses over or outright omits many points that make nvidia look negative. For instance; you do not hear about how the swift flickers when you are down around the 30hz baseline area of gsync, but they highlight that the freesync monitors flicker when they are at the low end of freesync functionality.

It's just what pcper does. They have a core audience and that core readership is generally going to be users who want to see nvidia put in as good a light as possible. I think the relationship between pcper and nvidia is a fairly symbiotic one in that pcper essentially advertises for every nvidia launch spinning things their way and nvidia provides content that gives pcper that appeal to that core dedicated nvidia user base. It's a site that can't be taken seriously if you are expecting objective reviews. I do enjoy their content for the lols though. Every nvidia launch is another 'review' they literally do in tandem with an nvidia marketing representative...
 
S.H.O.D.A.N. said:
For Gsync, a few hundred extra doesn't matter, but apparently it's the low end AMD customer that are supposed to buy those monitors to make them worth it?

Also, I just read a review of XB270HU with Freesync. Guess it's somehow inferior to the gsync version...
Click to expand...

You are mistaken. The XB270HU does NOT have freesync, its a Gsync monitor. The XB270HU is the first In-Plane Switching (IPS) monitor to use G-Sync. The model numbers are close, but different monitors.
 
Grooveriding said:
Pcper glosses over or outright omits many points that make nvidia look negative. For instance; you do not hear about how the swift flickers when you are down around the 30hz baseline area of gsync, but they highlight that the freesync monitors flicker when they are at the low end of freesync functionality.

It's just what pcper does. They have a core audience and that core readership is generally going to be users who want to see nvidia put in as good a light as possible. I think the relationship between pcper and nvidia is a fairly symbiotic one in that pcper essentially advertises for every nvidia launch spinning things their way and nvidia provides content that gives pcper that appeal to that core dedicated nvidia user base. It's a site that can't be taken seriously if you are expecting objective reviews. I do enjoy their content for the lols though. Every nvidia launch is another 'review' they literally do in tandem with an nvidia marketing representative...
Click to expand...

pcper were one of the few sites which did frametime testing on GTX 970 SLI and mentioned the frametime issues due to VRAM partitioning after Nvidia admitted the problem. The vast majority of sites just did not bother to do any testing to highlight the problems due to VRAM partitioning on GTX 970.

I do agree that pcper has a slight bias towards Nvidia but that happens with most websites as they tend to favour the dominant GPU company who contributes vast amounts of advertising dollars
 
Last edited:
Silverforce, take a closer look at the PCPer snapshot.

hukk23s.jpg


You are comparing a fast moving UFO demo to a windmill demo with sharp white -> black transitions.

Look at the horizontal separation of the blades. That's ONE frame. If the two frames are that separated, of course it doesn't blur. It ghosts.

And look at the color transition. It's WHITE to BLACK. Guess what happens when you overshoot a white to black transition? You expect a darker shadow where the previous white frame. The Swift clearly overshoots. You can see the darker shadow of the blade where the other two have the ghost image.
 
jj109 said:
Silverforce, take a closer look at the PCPer snapshot.

hukk23s.jpg


You are comparing a fast moving UFO demo to a windmill demo with sharp white -> black transitions.

Look at the horizontal separation of the blades. That's ONE frame. If the two frames are that separated, of course it doesn't blur. It ghosts.

And look at the color transition. It's WHITE to BLACK. Guess what happens when you overshoot a white to black transition? You expect a darker shadow where the previous white frame. The Swift clearly overshoots. You can see the darker shadow of the blade where the other two have the ghost image.
Click to expand...

Perhaps my monitor is not good enough but its really hard to see the darker image there. IMO its a lot less noticeable.
 
The general theme with freesync seems to be more user responsibility. YOU are responsible for making sure the frame rates stay in range, YOU need to decide whether to use vsync or not, YOU are responsible for making sure you choose a display with a good performing scaler or associated hardware.

The one peculiar thing I noted in the anandtech review, and I hear the sentiment echoed a lot, is that gsync/freesync matters less with 144hz. I would say that is not the case. Since is is a variable refresh rate technology, and 144hz would allow more possible variation, the technologies would actually get better with increasing refresh rate. I think stating otherwise must be wishful thinking on the part of owners of 144hz monitors without a variable refresh rate or fans of IPS monitors with a 60hz refresh rate.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top