Is G-Sync really necessary now?

[Cerb]

Of course it's not necessary. For one thing, how many low-input-lag non-TN monitors have it? None, TMK. How many will have it soon? Not many. Yet, somehow, we manage to game with our monitors...

Something like the Dell P2414H, P2714H, U2413, etc. (including 30"), but with G-sync, would be fantastic, IMO. I think I'm going to get a stop-gap 60Hz IPS 24", as things are, and see if G-sync and/or Free-sync proliferate sufficiently over the next few years.

 

[Cerb]

No it doesn't make it just vendor locked if there's a chance no future video card supports it. If G-Sync loses out and Nvidia stops making new video cards for it he'll have a very expensive monitor with no new video card capable taking advantage of it's feature.

Seems like if he's going to stick with the same monitor for a very long time, it would be wise to wait a bit longer and see how the sync war plays out.

Why would it be plausible that they would stop supporting it, though? The hard work is already done, and you can bet the hardware portion has been baked into at least the next 2 GPU generations, already. The chance that the feature will stop being supported before the monitor is either obsolete or failing is negligible.

 

[kasakka]

I would have a good read of this thread before considering the rog swift: http://www.overclock.net/t/1509599/official-asus-rog-swift-pg278q-owners-club/1360

The monitor is riddled with bugs and poor quality control issues going on that thread. Reading it you find more users have issues with it than don't and the funny thing is the stock levels are so low on the monitor that most people are finding what is in stock most of the time are newegg open box units because so many are returning them. :sneaky:

- Many units with dead pixels, bright pixels and even clusters of one or the other collected in a single area side by side.
- Pixel inversion issues resulting in dark vertical lines appearing when the image on the screen is not static.
- Some units run excessively hot.
- Units with noticeable backlight bleeding.

Not an issue, but because the panel is TN and given its size, I see user accounts that they do see vertical colour shift in normal use sitting in front of it.

I think this monitor is a lemon/rushed to market. I don't ever see as justified for any TN monitor, but an monitor with quality control like that manifesting in those sorts of issues is ridiculous. More so considering its Asus and their warranty/RMA support is some of the worst in the industry. Good luck RMAing one of these back to them.

Nvidia needs to get experienced quality monitor manufacturers like Dell, Eizo and NEC on board producing gysnc panels. The swift seems to be just another TN for Asus they slapped together and put a gsync module in. Crappy quality. :thumbsdown:

While I'm sure there are quality issues, I don't see any of the ones you mention on mine. I moved from a 30" Dell IPS to the ASUS Swift and feel the colours are great (just limited to sRGB which is fine by me), no dead pixels, fairly uniform panel. Viewing angles are good for TN and not bothering me at all. It's not another TN either, it's the first 8-bit TN panel to the market. TN is at the moment also the only panel technology that offers good enough response time to be a good pair for G-Sync and ULMB.

According to ASUS, they actually had to tweak the G-Sync module with things like adding a better heatsink and so on. It took a long time for them to get to the market so I don't see it as being rushed at all, the release date was moved a few times. Overall the display as a design is far from perfect and I certainly would not stand for the quality issues people are experiencing. Much less at this price.

That said, I'm really happy with mine and think it's a quality display. I'd wager G-Sync will be supported just fine at least for the "lifespan" of the display (let's say about 5 years before truly superior tech is available and I want to upgrade).

 

[Nebor]

I got a Swift this week (after waiting on backorder for over a month.) It's pretty good. It's not mind blowing or anything. I was coming from one of those cheap 28" I-inc panels. I guess the biggest difference I notice is how clear the image stays in FPS games even when you're turning fast. I haven't tried ULMB, just left it on G-sync. Oh, and this is with a GTX 780ti. Not worried about other cards since I'd never buy a non-NVidia video card.

 

[Gunbuster]

as far as gaming monitors go but its also ludicrously expensive.

Oh you kids, my original Dell 24" LCD was $1200!

 

[MaestroQuark]

I would have a good read of this thread before considering the rog swift: http://www.overclock.net/t/1509599/official-asus-rog-swift-pg278q-owners-club/1360
...
Nvidia needs to get experienced quality monitor manufacturers like Dell, Eizo and NEC on board producing gysnc panels. The swift seems to be just another TN for Asus they slapped together and put a gsync module in. Crappy quality. :thumbsdown:

Comments on the internet don't really help without an indication of actual analysis - failure rate, etc. People just happen to complain more often than they compliment. It might have a high failure rate, but I'd like more sources than posts on a forum.

I got my Swift from B&H early last week, and it's really really good. There is color shift, but only if I'm not sitting in the right spot. I'd mind that for a TV, but not for a desktop monitor. No dead pixels, no issues, and this thing is amazing in FPS games. I've also deliberately looked at a game I knew had a bad engine (Dragon Age 2) - frame rate drops with VSYNC, absolutely horrible tearing in cutscenes without it. Butter smooth on G-Sync.

 

[moonbogg]

I'm sure its nice, but I manage to pwn pretty good without it.

 

[RobertR1]

Sorry to high jack but what's considered the best 1600p monitor currently out?

I have a dell 3008 which is still working great but when playing games like CS:GO and other shooters it seems to struggle.

 

[bystander36]

Sorry to high jack but what's considered the best 1600p monitor currently out?

I have a dell 3008 which is still working great but when playing games like CS:GO and other shooters it seems to struggle.

Start a new thread. You won't derail this thread, and you'll get people who know your question opening the thread.

 

[Keysplayr]

But if freesync wins out, his next video card upgrade might not be able to utilize the G_sync feature in his Gsync monitor

It will if it's an Nvidia GPU. Last I checked, they're pretty good.

 

[Rhezuss]

I'm really tempted by the BenQ GW2765HT...
1440p, 27" IPS...but 60Hz. Not really a deal breaker for me but i'd have liked a 120Hz+ instead.

But it looks really nice for under 500$.

Any of you have tried this monitor?

 

[Subyman]

I have a Swift and if I turn Gsync off running at 144hz and the fps is below 144hz, I still see micro tears. With Gsync on, its a much better image. So if you are on a 60hz monitor, then you'd probably be okay without gsync but if there is any dip in fps you will get big tearing going on or a 60hz->30hz stutter.

IMO Gsync/freesync is the way all monitors should be made, and should have always been made. The monitor should fully draw the image before drawing another.

 

[Cerb]

IMO Gsync/freesync is the way all monitors should be made, and should have always been made. The monitor should fully draw the image before drawing another.

Due to availability of otherwise good monitors, I'm going to wait, but yes, it should have been, as soon as we went to digital transports. The normal way made sense for CRTs, where the video signal and display operation were tightly coupled. It should have been rethought for LCDs at least by HDMI, if not the creation of DP.

 

[mindbomb]

One interesting thing to note, is that if gsync requires any type of system timer, then I believe you would benefit from enabling HPET in the motherboard and operating system.

 

[NIGELG]

No.

 

[DigDog]

i'm reading OP's post and i can't find "i play hardcore FPS games" anywhere.



also, really disturbing what i read from Grooviriding's post.

 

[bystander36]

i'm reading OP's post and i can't find "i play hardcore FPS games" anywhere.



also, really disturbing what i read from Grooviriding's post.

What does hardcore FPS games have to do with tearing and the desire for high hz or G-sync? All games are much nicer with high refresh rates and G-sync/A-sync/Freesync.

 

[boozzer]

does gsynch just work or does it need game support like physic x?

 

[bystander36]

does gsynch just work or does it need game support like physic x?

Mostly it just works, with a few exceptions.

 

[BrightCandle]

Gsync doesn't work when games add their own types of frame metering. Diablo 3 is such a game, there are a few others but they are pretty rare. The games simply space out the frames themselves and cap the frame rate, the end result of which is that gsync either isn't compatible or can't help the game. But its a 99% solution and Nvidia adds profiles to remove gsync, not add it.

 

[DigDog]

What does hardcore FPS games have to do with tearing and the desire for high hz or G-sync? All games are much nicer with high refresh rates and G-sync/A-sync/Freesync.

tearing occurs when there is fast movement.

many games do not have very fast movement.

now, i'm sure *every* game looks nicer with a nice monitor; but the person playing Myst will have an easier time coping with a $100 monitor, rather than someone who depends on the lower latency of a $800 monitor.

makes sense?

at least thats what i make of the phrase " Is G-Sync really necessary now?"

 

[96Firebird]

Tearing occurs in all types of games. AC4 comes to mind, especially when you are "syncing" with an area. The camera pans around your character and shows the surrounding area, tearing is very noticeable there.

 

[Headfoot]

If you have the cash and you keep your monitor for a long time, definitely go with G-Sync. If you hold onto this monitor for 10 years, I would be very surprised if a Sync feature wasn't standard by then. It's definitely the future

 

[bystander36]

tearing occurs when there is fast movement.

many games do not have very fast movement.

now, i'm sure *every* game looks nicer with a nice monitor; but the person playing Myst will have an easier time coping with a $100 monitor, rather than someone who depends on the lower latency of a $800 monitor.

makes sense?

at least thats what i make of the phrase " Is G-Sync really necessary now?"

Tearing is very noticeable to me in any 1st person game where you turn and any game which you screen view is in constant motion when you move around, like Diablo and Starcraft games. Pretty much any game I play has lots of tearing when I turn off v-sync. It is just the nature of monitors.

 

[Rezist]

Ask yourself if you want the monitor even if it didn't have G-sync, if your looking for a fast display then it kinda makes sense, if you want a smooth experience below 60 fps would spending money on a sli set up to boost performance make more sense?