- Aug 20, 2010
- 1,931
- 95
- 91
Hey guys, is anybody else currently using G-Sync ? I'd like to know your impressions.
I bought the G-Sync DIY kit and installed on my Asus VG248QE 144hz monitor. Installation wasn't too difficult, but it did take about an hour and a half at a casual pace.
My initial impressions:
Pros:
-Screen tearing is completely gone now
-Some games seem to take to it very well, like Bioshock Infinite and Far Cry 3
-Seems to be the same amount of 'input lag' (referring to mouse responsiveness in game) as V-Sync off, so pretty much no input lag.
-some games at high fps are incredibly smooth, such as Hard Reset, a very visually intense twitch shooter. (like, smoother than before at a high fps)
Cons:
-Games at already high fps seem to not get much added smoothness
-Some games which I thought would be much smoother at 'lower' fps (I consider that below 60 fps) are only slightly better. Such as Crysis 3, The Secret World and Metro Last Light.
-small % of fps lost in titles because of polling
-high price ~ 200$
Conclusion:
I have gamed with 120hz+ monitors for about 3 years now, and I never use VSync, so I have always dealt with a small amount of tearing, however there was never much to speak of, or I never really noticed it. So this benefit is a bit lost on me, though having zero tearing is nice.
The benefits of G-Sync are supposed to be most noticeable at lower fps (between 30 and 60) but with my current setup it is rare for games to ever dip that low even at Ultra settings, especially because this panel is only 1080, so I believe that benefit is also somewhat lost for me.
In general, every game is now 'smoother' this benefit is one that I do notice, as I consider myself very (unfortunately) perceptive of lag, low and fluctuating fps and microstutter. For example, I can usually clearly tell the difference between 60 and 80 fps. I have even decided to stick to one graphics card after going years with CF/SLI to help eliminate the possiblity of microstutter. And yes, I know, not everybody has the same experice there.
If going to a 120hz monitor is = to 2X better than 60hz then I would say that going from 144hz to 144hz+G-Sync is an overall 20% improvement in overall experience. So, not the amount I was personally hoping for but still enough to be worth it to me.
I would say that unless you only game at 60hz currently, or are very perceptive of the things I mentioned then you had better wait for the 1440p G-Sync panels to arrive because it should be a much greater benefit.
OR if you only have a mid-high end Nvidia graphics card which does not keep most games above 80-90 fps, then it also may be a worthy purchase.
Has anybody else gotten their toes wet with G-Sync or experienced it first hand ? I'd like to know your impressions.
I think a lot of reviwers are coming from 60hz panels so *some* of the benefits they laud are simply from a higher panel hz rate.
I bought the G-Sync DIY kit and installed on my Asus VG248QE 144hz monitor. Installation wasn't too difficult, but it did take about an hour and a half at a casual pace.
My initial impressions:
Pros:
-Screen tearing is completely gone now
-Some games seem to take to it very well, like Bioshock Infinite and Far Cry 3
-Seems to be the same amount of 'input lag' (referring to mouse responsiveness in game) as V-Sync off, so pretty much no input lag.
-some games at high fps are incredibly smooth, such as Hard Reset, a very visually intense twitch shooter. (like, smoother than before at a high fps)
Cons:
-Games at already high fps seem to not get much added smoothness
-Some games which I thought would be much smoother at 'lower' fps (I consider that below 60 fps) are only slightly better. Such as Crysis 3, The Secret World and Metro Last Light.
-small % of fps lost in titles because of polling
-high price ~ 200$
Conclusion:
I have gamed with 120hz+ monitors for about 3 years now, and I never use VSync, so I have always dealt with a small amount of tearing, however there was never much to speak of, or I never really noticed it. So this benefit is a bit lost on me, though having zero tearing is nice.
The benefits of G-Sync are supposed to be most noticeable at lower fps (between 30 and 60) but with my current setup it is rare for games to ever dip that low even at Ultra settings, especially because this panel is only 1080, so I believe that benefit is also somewhat lost for me.
In general, every game is now 'smoother' this benefit is one that I do notice, as I consider myself very (unfortunately) perceptive of lag, low and fluctuating fps and microstutter. For example, I can usually clearly tell the difference between 60 and 80 fps. I have even decided to stick to one graphics card after going years with CF/SLI to help eliminate the possiblity of microstutter. And yes, I know, not everybody has the same experice there.
If going to a 120hz monitor is = to 2X better than 60hz then I would say that going from 144hz to 144hz+G-Sync is an overall 20% improvement in overall experience. So, not the amount I was personally hoping for but still enough to be worth it to me.
I would say that unless you only game at 60hz currently, or are very perceptive of the things I mentioned then you had better wait for the 1440p G-Sync panels to arrive because it should be a much greater benefit.
OR if you only have a mid-high end Nvidia graphics card which does not keep most games above 80-90 fps, then it also may be a worthy purchase.
Has anybody else gotten their toes wet with G-Sync or experienced it first hand ? I'd like to know your impressions.
I think a lot of reviwers are coming from 60hz panels so *some* of the benefits they laud are simply from a higher panel hz rate.
Facebook
Twitter