144 hz 1980x1080 vs G sync 144 hz 2560x1440

[ka669]

So i own an 24" 144 hz screen which I had before G sync came out and recently upgraded my graphics card to a gigabyte gtx 980ti waterforce. I play primarily FPS games and since I ve upgraded my GPU I ve capped my fps to 120 because I also use lightboost and I really don't notice any tearing or stattering. Its alot of money to move up to 27" G-S.1440p.. and would it make so much difference. I know it would if I had a normal 60hz monitor and mid performing gpu! Can I hold of until the prices drop to more reasonable levels?

 

[boju]

Yes you can wait it out, screen tear would be one of the reasons to upgrade besides a larger screen/high resolution. If you mostly play games that are easy to run without using V-sync then wait for prices to drop. @ 1080p you'll see less frame fluctuations then you would with 1440p where Gsync will come in handy.

 

[thor220]

I'd second holding off or perhaps even switching over to AMD. Free-Sync monitors are much cheaper than G-Sync monitors and work just as good if not between with AMD's sort-of recent Crimson update. Of course you may still want to wait for next-gen cards to come out this year.

 

[ka669]

Thx boju I will do that exactly, I see alot of g sync panels coming out maybe the increased production of panels will drive the prices down. Thor I know freesynk is cheaper but to swap out my 980ti would make it even more expensive.

 

[thor220]

Thx boju I will do that exactly, I see alot of g sync panels coming out maybe the increased production of panels will drive the prices down. Thor I know freesynk is cheaper but to swap out my 980ti would make it even more expensive.

You shouldn't expect the price of G-Sync to decrease. Nvidia can charge whatever it wants so production has nothing to do with the cost to make G-Sync monitors. Nvidia can deny a monitor manufacturer G-Sync while AMD cannot, Free-Sync is an open standard.

The cost of buying a G-Sync monitor is that you're also stuck with Nvidia GPUs. Anyone can adopt Free-Sync, Intel has already pledged support.

In addition, G-Sync can only ever work with Display Port. Free-Sync can be expanded to HDMI, DVI, ect.

 

[boju]

Freesync has no royalties true and monitors are cheaper with it but not a staggering amount. It is a shame Nvidia had to be proprieties a chip behind a panel but to be fair they first tackled the tearing/lag issue first i'll give them that. AMD could have done the same and so could have Intel, if they thought of it first.

Freesync isn't useless, its fair game sync technology and because of that Gsync wont be too overpriced otherwise they will be in trouble and they know it.

 

[ka669]

Freesync has no royalties true and monitors are cheaper with it but not a staggering amount. It is a shame Nvidia had to be proprieties a chip behind a panel but to be fair they first tackled the tearing/lag issue first i'll give them that. AMD could have done the same and so could have Intel, if they thought of it first.

Freesync isn't useless, its fair game sync technology and because of that Gsync wont be too overpriced otherwise they will be in trouble and they know it.

Indeed just look at Asus Rog freesynk and g sync theres only £60 difference in them. Ok the freesync is IPS but you can still opt for Acer's IPS version for same money as Asus Led panel.

I hope theres increased adoption of freesync I m not against it, this will benefit all of us, it's just that nvidia graphics card have treated me much better than AMD since I switched.

By the way remember back in 2000 Toshiba vs Sony on HD vs Blu Ray, Sony eventually won.

 

[boju]

At the same time i'm also thinking it's ironic for Nvidia to block Freesync working on their cards despite AMD's 'Free' marketing, as of now its only AMD using Freesync (With hint of Intel in the fold), could call that unintentional proprietism. Both sync technologies are using the same port, DisplayPort. Vesa must be rubbing their hands together between the both of them somehow.

There are rumors Gsync will eventually expand to HDMI as well but theres no definite answers, just a load of bs hush hush theories. Don't know why the companies (aka Sony and inc) are being so secretive.

All you got is a bunch of wires leading to a single chip, be it DP, HDMI or Dvi, just get it there and be done. Freesync uses software similar to Adaptive Vsync so it is different, not as effective though.

 

[boju]

Freesync has no royalties true and monitors are cheaper with it but not a staggering amount. It is a shame Nvidia had to be proprieties a chip behind a panel but to be fair they first tackled the tearing/lag issue first i'll give them that. AMD could have done the same and so could have Intel, if they thought of it first.

Freesync isn't useless, its fair game sync technology and because of that Gsync wont be too overpriced otherwise they will be in trouble and they know it.

Indeed just look at Asus Rog freesynk and g sync theres only £60 difference in them. Ok the freesync is IPS but you can still opt for Acer's IPS version for same money as Asus Led panel.

I hope theres increased adoption of freesync I m not against it, this will benefit all of us, it's just that nvidia graphics card have treated me much better than AMD since I switched.

By the way remember back in 2000 Toshiba vs Sony on HD vs Blu Ray, Sony eventually won.

Get that from both sides, Nvidia <> AMD. Cant we just play nice ? Everyone knows we need competition to keep prices to a acceptable level but imagine if Intel came in with force unexpectedly killing the competition. Then AMD and Nvidia join forces and regain the game of thrones. If i was geek enough i'd cry =D

 

[thor220]

At the same time i'm also thinking it's ironic for Nvidia to block Freesync working on their cards despite AMD's 'Free' marketing, as of now its only AMD using Freesync (With hint of Intel in the fold), could call that unintentional proprietism. Both sync technologies are using the same port, DisplayPort. Vesa must be rubbing their hands together between the both of them somehow.

There are rumors Gsync will eventually expand to HDMI as well but theres no definite answers, just a load of bs hush hush theories. Don't know why the companies (aka Sony and inc) are being so secretive.

All you got is a bunch of wires leading to a single chip, be it DP, HDMI or Dvi, just get it there and be done. Freesync uses software similar to Adaptive Vsync so it is different, not as effective though.

After AMD's crimson update, Freey-Sync performs exactly the same as G-Sync. The only difference being with free-sync you can choose whether to double the frames when below the refresh rate or not.

Free-Sync is not just software of AMD would have implemented it universally by now. Free-Sync requires a special scaler just like G-Sync. The difference is AMD does not make the scaler, it's designed by monitor OEMs to meet specifications of the display port standard. One Free-Sync becomes more mature it will be better because the technology is technically superior. Nvidia's G-Sync doesn't work under 30 FPS. Free-Sync can work all the way down to 4 FPS. Right now OEMs have yet to get it that low yet.

If Nvidia ever does release a new version of G-Sync it will likely require their latest cards and won't work with 1st generation monitors.

 

[boju]

Yea ok, most of what you said make sense. I just hope Nvidia aren't cruel to those who bought these Gsync monitors only have to buy another monitor in future. People buy monitors as an investment, something that will hang around for a long time. If Nvidia does that, people will loose faith and somehow i don't think that will happen will be very bad. Newer gpus i hope will be backwards compatible.

 

[thor220]

Yea ok, most of what you said make sense. I just hope Nvidia aren't cruel to those who bought these Gsync monitors only have to buy another monitor in future. People buy monitors as an investment, something that will hang around for a long time. If Nvidia does that, people will loose faith and somehow i don't think that will happen will be very bad. Newer gpus i hope will be backwards compatible.

Even if Nvidia did do that, most people would still buy Nvidia. Everyone seems to perceive Nvidia as the end-all for PC gaming graphics. In reality, AMD and Nvidia are really close. Nvidia has good marketing while AMD has none (it doesn't have the money for it). Just as a test, go into a forum (any forum) and post something critical of Nvidia and something critical of AMD. Watch how quickly your opinion in the Nvidia post will be beaten down by Nvidia's zealot squad. There are plenty of people who choose team green just because they want to be a bro.

 

[boju]

Lol, no i know. I'm only ever after commonsense and reason based on circumstance, i don't take sides. I can't be serious after this line sorry lol Judgement day, the Zealot Squad vs the Red Rangers:

To be continued....