GTX-1070/G-sync v. R9 390/Freesync

[AtenRa]

What a horrible idea. Buy low end AMD to wait to see how Vega turns out, or buy high end Nvidia now, have no concerns and be happy with high performance for the next nine months while Vega is incubating.

You're telling him to go for the repeat of the "wait for Polaris" advice that screwed a bunch of people.

Reasoning, the VAST majority keeps their monitors longer than their GPUs.

Buying the best FreeSync monitor you can today because you will keep it for 2-3 or more GPU upgrades. Spending half the GTX 1070 price buying the RX 470 now and have the ability to use your FreeSync monitor in games with high Image Quality and lower than 60fps (single player games that dont need high fps) until you have a very fast next Generation DX-12 GPU with Vega for next generation games.

Also, GTX 1070 is not even capable today of producing 60fps in newest demanding DX-12 games at 1440p (Deus Ex MD), so better get the FreeSync monitor + RX 470 or RX 480 today than GTX 1070 without FreeSync.

Example,

It is better to have 43fps (RX 480) with FreeSync than 49fps (GTX 1070) without FreeSync

 

[Arachnotronic]

Reasoning, the VAST majority keeps their monitors longer than their GPUs.

Buying the best FreeSync monitor you can today because you will keep it for 2-3 or more GPU upgrades. Spending half the GTX 1070 price buying the RX 470 now and have the ability to use your FreeSync monitor in games with high Image Quality and lower than 60fps (single player games that dont need high fps) until you have a very fast next Generation DX-12 GPU with Vega for next generation games.

Also, GTX 1070 is not even capable today of producing 60fps in newest demanding DX-12 games at 1440p (Deus Ex MD), so better get the FreeSync monitor + RX 470 or RX 480 today than GTX 1070 without FreeSync.

Example,

It is better to have 43fps (RX 480) with FreeSync than 49fps (GTX 1070) without FreeSync

The OP's budget allows for a G sync monitor, interesting how you didnt recommend this. Seems almost like you want to force the OP into the AMD ecosystem by having him get a placeholder Rx 470 AMD a FreeSync monitor so that whether Vega is competitive or not, the OP is stuck buying an AMD GPU.

 

[AtenRa]

The OP's budget allows for a G sync monitor, interesting how you didnt recommend this. Seems almost like you want to force the OP into the AMD ecosystem by having him get a placeholder Rx 470 AMD a FreeSync monitor so that whether Vega is competitive or not, the OP is stuck buying an AMD GPU.

I find the FreeSync Monitors much better in terms of price/features than G-Sync. The competition between the FreeSync Monitor manufactures provides me (Consumer) with lower priced monitors with better features than G-Sync. There are FreeSync TVs coming soon as well, it is pointless to go for G-Sync now in the end of 2016 with all those FreeSync monitors in the market.

As I said before this is what I would do, if you want to spend more for G-Sync be my quest. I wouldn't pay $200-300 more for G-Sync and another $200 more for the GTX 1070 and next year I would need to upgrade my GPU again because it will not be sufficient for 1440p 60fps gaming in the latest games. I prefer to spend the extra today for a bigger FreeSync monitor and then upgrade to a better GPU next year.

 

[Thinker_145]

Reasoning, the VAST majority keeps their monitors longer than their GPUs.

Buying the best FreeSync monitor you can today because you will keep it for 2-3 or more GPU upgrades. Spending half the GTX 1070 price buying the RX 470 now and have the ability to use your FreeSync monitor in games with high Image Quality and lower than 60fps (single player games that dont need high fps) until you have a very fast next Generation DX-12 GPU with Vega for next generation games.

Also, GTX 1070 is not even capable today of producing 60fps in newest demanding DX-12 games at 1440p (Deus Ex MD), so better get the FreeSync monitor + RX 470 or RX 480 today than GTX 1070 without FreeSync.

Example,

It is better to have 43fps (RX 480) with FreeSync than 49fps (GTX 1070) without FreeSync

4 years from now we will have HDR/OLED monitors which will make current high end monitors look like a POS so if anything this is a bad time to get a really high end monitor with stupid IPS panel.

5 years ago 22-24" 1080p60hz IPS was all the rage. Now people are desperate to upgrade them. My previous monitor died in its 4th year. This notion that a monitor lasts forever is simply not true.

Sent from my HTC One M9

 

[bystander36]

Reasoning, the VAST majority keeps their monitors longer than their GPUs.

Buying the best FreeSync monitor you can today because you will keep it for 2-3 or more GPU upgrades. Spending half the GTX 1070 price buying the RX 470 now and have the ability to use your FreeSync monitor in games with high Image Quality and lower than 60fps (single player games that dont need high fps) until you have a very fast next Generation DX-12 GPU with Vega for next generation games.

Also, GTX 1070 is not even capable today of producing 60fps in newest demanding DX-12 games at 1440p (Deus Ex MD), so better get the FreeSync monitor + RX 470 or RX 480 today than GTX 1070 without FreeSync.

Example,

It is better to have 43fps (RX 480) with FreeSync than 49fps (GTX 1070) without FreeSync

While I would agree it's better to get the monitor you desire before the GPU if you have to choose between them, but if he doesn't, there isn't much reason not to just get the best GPU and monitor combination now. Waiting 6+ months for a GPU, not even knowing how it will perform, is 6+ months of not enjoying your system as much as you could have. The only reason to wait is if you have to. The OP can start enjoying his system now, as he has the budget.

 

[showb1z]

The OP's budget allows for a G sync monitor, interesting how you didnt recommend this. Seems almost like you want to force the OP into the AMD ecosystem by having him get a placeholder Rx 470 AMD a FreeSync monitor so that whether Vega is competitive or not, the OP is stuck buying an AMD GPU.

There is no such thing like an "AMD ecosystem". It's a VESA standard.
It may be JHH's dream to turn Nvidia into the Apple of computer hardware. But we shouldn't allow or support anti-consumer practices like that. Computer hardware should conform to industry wide standards.

@OP Nevertheless, since AMD doesn't really have anything to compete with a 1070 we have to be realistic. And whichever way you go, buying a new monitor now without A-sync is probably a bad move. Assuming you're looking at the BenQ XL2730, which G-sync monitor are you looking at?

 

[zinfamous]

Standards battle? There is no battle. Gsync is the more robust solution and the installed base that Gsync targets is much larger than the base that FreeSync targets.

OP, get a nice Gsync monitor and 1070. The monitor will last you for years and NV's execution at the high end of the gaming market should give you confidence that once you're in the NVIDIA/Gsync ecosystem, you will have compelling GPUs to buy.

Why is G-Sync the more "robust" solution? What functionality beyond Freesync does it offer? ...other than the +$200-300 cost and fraction of available displays that offer it? I honestly don't know, because it seems that it is simply a branded version of adaptive sync, like Freesync, but with that lovely "premium tax."

I remember when consumers used to lash out at Sony for these type of lock-in "ecosystem" strategies with their exclusive formats. Either those consumers died out, or they just aren't part of this GPU market.

 

[bystander36]

Why is G-Sync the more "robust" solution? What functionality beyond Freesync does it offer? ...other than the +$200-300 cost and fraction of available displays that offer it? I honestly don't know, because it seems that it is simply a branded version of adaptive sync, like Freesync, but with that lovely "premium tax."

I remember when consumers used to lash out at Sony for these type of lock-in "ecosystem" strategies with their exclusive formats. Either those consumers died out, or they just aren't part of this GPU market.

Just to answer the question:
1) It includes ULMB in the chip.
2) They are tuned for each monitor to reduce color, blur and flickering issues.
3) At FPS lower than the hz can go, which causes flickering (30-40hz), it will double up refreshes, and continue to sync with the GPU, rather than turning off sync all together.
4) Additional fine tuning can be done through drivers, rather than having to be sent back to the manufacturer to flash a bios in the monitor.

That's all the perks of g-sync I'm aware of.

 

[Winston Marmaduke III]

Wow, thanks for all the responses guys. Selecting a display and card is NEVER easy is it? I don't think that will ever change LOL.

I am really leaning towards that BenQ, looks like a very nice monitor. But, as far as video cards, honestly I'd like to avoid Nvidia now due to price and that proprietary g-sync crap really rubbed me the wrong way, but... the AMD stuff just doesn't seem to cut it either. The Fury X would have been an easy choice if it wasn't for the 4 flipping gigs of memory WTF?

I saw the "game changing" videos of how Doom improved performance after the Vulkan patch...which is great, but it's only one game. And 4 gigs of memory on the Fury X!!!!!!

I may just buy a cheapo POS card, give it to my wife (who doesn't game or anything) take back my GTX-660 and stick with the monitor I have now and re-evaluate in a few months. Seems like there's a buying frenzy right now on these AMD cards anyway and I believe they are way overpriced. And that was before I read the updates to this thread this morning and learned a new one is coming out! Vega or whatever!

I'm thinking November is going to be a better time to buy a Display setup.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Wow, thanks for all the responses guys. Selecting a display and card is NEVER easy is it? I don't think that will ever change LOL.

No, it's actually really easy. Pick your budget. If that budget is $250 or less then it's pretty much a wash between the AMD and NVIDIA GPUs at those price points. If your budget is $379+, then you pick an NVIDIA card.

If you buy an NVIDIA card, then you would probably benefit from picking up a G-Sync monitor. If you buy an AMD card, you will benefit from picking up a FreeSync monitor.

I am really leaning towards that BenQ, looks like a very nice monitor. But, as far as video cards, honestly I'd like to avoid Nvidia now due to price and that proprietary g-sync crap really rubbed me the wrong way, but... the AMD stuff just doesn't seem to cut it either. The Fury X would have been an easy choice if it wasn't for the 4 flipping gigs of memory WTF?

GTX 1070 is cheaper and faster than the R9 Fury X. "Proprietary G-Sync crap" -- hate to break it to you, but FreeSync is proprietary to AMD, NVIDIA cards can't use it.

I may just buy a cheapo POS card, give it to my wife (who doesn't game or anything) take back my GTX-660 and stick with the monitor I have now and re-evaluate in a few months. Seems like there's a buying frenzy right now on these AMD cards anyway and I believe they are way overpriced. And that was before I read the updates to this thread this morning and learned a new one is coming out! Vega or whatever!

Uh, what? Vega isn't coming until sometime in the first half of 2017, and when companies say "first half" they usually mean "second quarter." If you want to join the #WaitForVega movement, then you will be stuck with that GTX 660 for a long time.

I'm thinking November is going to be a better time to buy a Display setup.

Why?

 

[Headfoot]

So all in all, I think my original recommendation still makes the most sense. Either keep your current display, or get a no "sync" 120/144hz display to keep the monitor budget modest so you can get the faster 1070 off the bat. You can then upgrade the monitor when and if you want to later. I believe nVidia will eventually cave and have some level of support for the VESA standard. When that day will be I can't say. But putting FPGAs in monitors is a massive cost and nobody is happy paying it so I very much doubt it will be like that forever.

For a gaming monitor IMO this is the order of importance of features for a single monitor set up:
Refresh Rate > Resolution > FreeSync / G-Sync > Real Contrast Ratio > Color Quality > Off-Angle viewing > Nice to have extra features (speakers, USB hub etc.)

I say this having personally used: 144hz FreeSync monitor, 120hz no-sync TN monitor, overclocked to 90hz Korean 1440p panel that were popular a few years back, old TN LCDs, 3x1080 Eyefinity on IPS @ 60hz, High-end VA panel @ 60hz, CRTs back in the day like most everyone else. I've used basically every popular monitor type and configuration in the past 15 years except ultrawidescreen 21:9 which I may jump into soon, and that above is the list i've arrived at.

I don't do video or photo stuff though so keep that in mind. I'm talking from pure productivity and gaming perspectives only.

Soon we can add HDR to that line up.

In terms of GPU + Monitor budget, these are the best options IMO:

$500-550: 1070 + inexpensive 120/144hz monitor
$300-350: inexpensive FreeSync monitor + 480/470
$800-1000: I'd say wait for 1080 Ti and Vega and choose based on which is faster.
$1500+: uber budget, Titan X (P) + Gsync is the best you can buy today

 

[crisium]

GTX 1070 is cheaper and faster than the R9 Fury X. "Proprietary G-Sync crap" -- hate to break it to you, but FreeSync is proprietary to AMD, NVIDIA cards can't use it

That's a half truth. FreeSync is not proprietary, but you are correct that Nvidia cards can't use it. The essence of the two syncs is thus: AMD can't use G-Sync because Nvidia doesn't allow it; Nvidia can't use Freesync because Nvidia doesn't allow it.

 

[zinfamous]

I still think the best bet for you right now is a 1070 + 100/144hz non-adaptive sync display.

Vega is almost certainly more than 6 months away. You could go with a 480/470 or 1060, but I'm not sure that will "wow" you and wouldn't be great options for 100/144hz with demanding games.

For as long as you have been happy with the 660, the 1070 will serve you well into the next several years. Yeah it sucks that AMD doesn't compete at the price/performance/age of 1070, but it's still a great option if your budget is there.

The higher refresh display with the 1070 performance is going to be a huge step up for you and I think you are over-thinking this.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Can always go with a 1080 and ignore gsync.
Or go with 2x 480X...

 

[Erithan13]

"Proprietary G-Sync crap" -- hate to break it to you, but FreeSync is proprietary to AMD, NVIDIA cards can't use it.

Under what definition is Freesync 'proprietary' to AMD? There are no royalties on the tech, no licensing fees and it has been adopted by VESA as an (optional) standard on displayport. Intel will be adopting it soon as well and there's rumors of freesync TVs in development.

The fact that Nvidia cards cannot utilise freesync is a problem that starts and ends at one place: Nvidia. Trying to paint that as a fault of AMD or freesync itself is absolutely laughable.

 

[Winston Marmaduke III]

hate to break it to you, but FreeSync is proprietary to AMD, NVIDIA cards can't use it.

If Nvidia doesn't support Freesync, that's Nvidia's fault alone as FS is open source.

Uh, what? Vega isn't coming until sometime in the first half of 2017, and when companies say "first half" they usually mean "second quarter." If you want to join the #WaitForVega movement, then you will be stuck with that GTX 660 for a long time.

I'm not interested in a Vega, I'm interested in what it getting closer to release will do to prices for everything else. If the Fury X was a tad cheaper and had 6 gigs of memory, I'd be all over it.

Why?

Online Black Friday sales. Even if BF doesn't have many good deals, I'm hoping generally prices settle a bit by then.

Even if I can't get that 660 back, I'll just run video off the motherboard. I need a PC now and haven't gamed in over 5 years. Doom and Skyrim will still be around whenever I get around to them.

 

[Winston Marmaduke III]

Can always go with a 1080 and ignore gsync.
Or go with 2x 480X...

I actually thought about picking up a 480 with the thought of adding one later. Then I came to my senses

 

[showb1z]

Could just buy a 480 and a nice A-sync monitor and then sell the 480 for whatever comes next. 480 resale value will be good for quite a while. Not having gamed in 5 years you have a huge selection of games a 480 can run flawlessly.

Also, to put things straight. Adaptive sync is the VESA standard added in DP 1.2a, Freesync is AMD's implementation to make it work with their cards.
It's not like Nvidia has to implement AMD tech or anything. No doubt they already have their own A-sync implementation ready to go, should they decide to support it (and I'm guessing they will sooner or later).

 

[Shmee]

This sounds like a good plan, plus Nvidia can always support Adaptive sync in the future. Then it could be supported by either graphics company. A 480 would be pretty good for now, like mentioned. I went ahead and bought a freesync 144Hz 1440p monitor to go with my 1070, I will either use it when Nvidia supports it, or upgrade to Vega later.

 

[antihelten]

Under what definition is Freesync 'proprietary' to AMD? There are no royalties on the tech, no licensing fees and it has been adopted by VESA as an (optional) standard on displayport

Technically Freesync is proprietary to AMD, since no-one else can use it unless AMD allows them to. Of course this is pretty much irrelevant since other players (such as Intel or Nvidia) don't have to use Freesync to gain access to VESA's adaptive-sync (freesync is simply AMD's implementation of adaptive-sync).

Also while VESA does offer some free standards, most of their newer ones require a license (and thus a fee). Of course this has nothing to do with freesync itself, but would instead apply to adaptive-sync.

If Nvidia doesn't support Freesync, that's Nvidia's fault alone as FS is open source.

FreeSync is not open source. Freesync is AMD's implementation of VESA's adaptive-sync (not to be confused with Nvidia's adaptive vsync). VESA's adaptive-sync isn't open source either.

Regarding the topic of the thread, I might personally hold of a bit on the monitor and see how the whole HDR show turns out. Right now there isn't really any HDR content (and only very few HDR displays), but with the new consoles supporting HDR, I would suspect to see an uptick in HDR games in the near future.

 

[Winston Marmaduke III]

I still think the best bet for you right now is a 1070 + 100/144hz non-adaptive sync display.

As much as I want to argue with you and get an AMD card....I'm beginning to realize you and 90% of the people are right...that damn 1070 is hard to beat for the price. Any reqs on a non-adaptive sync 144hz monitor with 1ms response?

The 480 and fury seem to have the most potential with vulkan and whatnot, but yeah, I've bought for "potential" before and gotten burned every time.

 

[Arachnotronic]

This sounds like a good plan, plus Nvidia can always support Adaptive sync in the future.

NVIDIA won't support Adaptive Sync in the future, their execs have been very clear that they are all in on G-Sync. After all, they've put a lot of work/effort into building it, why should they give it all up?

 

[kalrith]

3) At FPS lower than the hz can go, which causes flickering (30-40hz), it will double up refreshes, and continue to sync with the GPU, rather than turning off sync all together.

Freesync can actually do that now (or something similar to that). It's called LFC (Low Framerate Compensation). It's automatically (but only) available on all Freesync monitors where max refresh is at least 2.5 times min refresh. (PDF Source: http://www.amd.com/Documents/freesync-lfc.pdf)

 

[showb1z]

NVIDIA won't support Adaptive Sync in the future, their execs have been very clear that they are all in on G-Sync. After all, they've put a lot of work/effort into building it, why should they give it all up?

Or they could just support both.

 

[bystander36]

NVIDIA won't support Adaptive Sync in the future, their execs have been very clear that they are all in on G-Sync. After all, they've put a lot of work/effort into building it, why should they give it all up?

It could hurt sales. If people start to see that an A-sync monitor is a lot cheaper, and they can buy an AMD GPU to take advantage of it, they may just do that. It'll be really helpful if AMD would get a competitive GPU at the high end soon to take advantage of this possibility.