G-sync vs Free Sync and gtx 970 windforce 3x

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
JonRichardson

JonRichardson

Reputable
Jun 5, 2014
39
0
4,530
The title pretty much is asking my question lol
I have viewed some things saying DEFINITELY DO GSYNC and DEFINITELY DO FREE SYNC.

G-sync vs Free Sync with sli gtx 970 windforce 3x
 
Solution
rcald2000
I admit that I misread your post and didn't see the "SLI". My mistake.

Yes, g-sync is more expensive. However many freesync displays don't enable adaptive sync at the lower FPS ranges; shouldn't be an issue for you since you have two 970s in SLI. Since you already have nvidia GPUs, the question isn't whether g-sync or freesync, because you don't have an option as long as you're using a Nvidia graphics card. The real question is g-sync or not? That is something that you'll have to determine based on your budget and how important it is to you. I have to say that I own an Acer 1440p g-sync 165 Hz IPS display and it's amazing. However, it's a $700 display =<
Sort by date Sort by votes
JonRichardson

JonRichardson

Reputable
Jun 5, 2014
39
0
4,530


If Gsync is better for lower framerates why is there Gsync on 144hz monitors?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
rcald2000

rcald2000

Splendid
Nov 3, 2009
5,558
146
28,990
While either monitor will basically work with your GTX 970, the adaptive feature will only work on a g-sync display with a Nvidia graphics card.

Here is a question I pose, and I admit that I don't know the answer to: Does g-sync offer any benefit if your current graphics card doesn't produce FPS above your displays maximum Hz spec? I currently own a g-sync display and I previously owned a GTX 970. That card is ideal for 1080p @ 60 FPS, but in most games it won't produce frames too far above that. I just wonder if a g-sync display is the best use of your upgrade dollars, unless you simply want it because you want it. I could certainly understand that mindset.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
B

bystander

Champion
Dec 9, 2009
15,141
6
57,965


He said it benefits the most, not that it doesn't benefit at all. For the most part, once you hit 90 FPS with v-sync/g-sync, any more is barely if at all noticeable. But with 144hz without any syncing, tearing is barely noticeable.

144hz is achievable, and since Nvidia made these expensive modules for G-sync, they saw no need to limit the hz. One module works for every monitor, with some tweaking of internal settings. It also gives the LMB mode along with it, which works best at high refresh rates (not at the same time as G-sync). It also allows for a few very fast frames, mixed in with slow ones to be displayed as they are rendered, rather than getting averaged out.

Just because you have 144hz, does not mean you need 144 FPS, as you'll soon find out, 144 FPS is rarely maintainable in most all games.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JonRichardson

JonRichardson

Reputable
Jun 5, 2014
39
0
4,530


I've always had my 970s SLId together but I can tell you that when I did some OCing I managed to pull well over 200+ in some games like Diablo 3 and at the lowest 100+

From what I've read Free Sync will do what Gsync does at a lower cost and I've read that Gsync forces Vsync to be on where as Free Sync does not. Also, Gsync takes away your monitors settings ability I believe.
http://wccftech.com/amd-freesync-nvidia-gsync-verdict/

BUT
alternatively I read this article which leans heavily towards Gsync
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/04/09/g-sync-or-freesync-amd-nvidia/

It's hard to tell who is biased and who's doing the research
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
rcald2000

rcald2000

Splendid
Nov 3, 2009
5,558
146
28,990
I admit that I misread your post and didn't see the "SLI". My mistake.

Yes, g-sync is more expensive. However many freesync displays don't enable adaptive sync at the lower FPS ranges; shouldn't be an issue for you since you have two 970s in SLI. Since you already have nvidia GPUs, the question isn't whether g-sync or freesync, because you don't have an option as long as you're using a Nvidia graphics card. The real question is g-sync or not? That is something that you'll have to determine based on your budget and how important it is to you. I have to say that I own an Acer 1440p g-sync 165 Hz IPS display and it's amazing. However, it's a $700 display =<
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
B

bystander

Champion
Dec 9, 2009
15,141
6
57,965


A single 970 can get you 100 FPS in Diablo 3, but many other games will not allow you to get those FPS. In Diablo 3, you are more likely to prefer LMB mode instead of G-sync.

G-sync also does not force V-sync on. You have the option. At release, it was forced on, but to be honest, why would you want to sync at lower FPS, but not at higher FPS? You'll get tearing if you go past 144 FPS. It's on option for both. G-sync also works at lower than 30 FPS, which Freesync didn't used to, but they added that feature.

The only noteworthy difference, is the G-sync module comes with Low Motion Blur mode, but also costs more. And Nvidia can't use Freesync, just as AMD can't use G-sync. Your choice is already made for you, unless you buy a new video card.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
renz496

renz496

Champion
Jun 16, 2009
14,249
210
53,090


the thing is nvidia cards did not work with adaptive sync. so every so called 'freesync' monitors out there will not going to give smoothness benefit provided with variable refresh rates. also nvidia already update the how gsync handles the frame rate when reach at the upper limit of the refresh rates. before when the frame rates reach the maximum referesh rate v-sync automatically assumed. but that no longer the case where nvidia now give user the option on how gsync work on the upper referesh rates.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom