Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Nvidia Responds to GeForce 600 Series V-Sync Stuttering Issue

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 68 comments

Nvidia provides an official response to the reported v-sync stuttering issue with its GeForce GTX 600 Series

Tom's Hardware has received several requests to look into a v-sync issue that a number of owners are seeing with Nvidia's new GeForce GTX 600-series graphics cards. A number of readers have pointed us in the direction of a very long forum thread where multiple customers express concern over stuttering problems with their Kepler-based graphics cards.

Our editorial team played through a number of games with GeForce GTX 600-series board and was unsuccessful in reproducing the issue. As such, we're fairly confident that the issue does not apply to every configuration based on Nvidia's newest cards; some folks are experiencing it, while others aren't.

Eager for an explanation, Tom's Hardware reached out to Nvidia for its response, understanding that owners of $400, $500, and $1000 graphics cards want to know why their boards are misbehaving. The company sent over an official response to the GeForce GTX 600-series stuttering issue, which reads:

We have received reports of an intermittent v-sync stuttering issue from some of our customers. We’ve root caused the issue to a driver bug and identified a fix for it. The fix requires extensive testing though, and will not be available until our next major driver release targeted for June (post-R300). For users experiencing this issue, the interim workaround is to disable v-sync via the Nvidia Control Panel or in-game graphics settings menu.

Although that's not necessarily the most reassuring message, we're at least glad to see that Nvidia has identified the issue and is working on a fix. We'll update you if we hear any more on this, so stay tuned!


Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 26 Hide
    julianbautista87 , May 18, 2012 5:23 PM
    that's for those who said that AMD's drivers suck. I have a hd 6850 and I haven't had the first driver issue.
  • 18 Hide
    CaedenV , May 18, 2012 5:26 PM
    knipedVsync frequently makes a game unplayable with a mouse anyways so who does this really affect?

    what are you talking about? Vsync is great for reducing screen tearing issues, and helping up the graphical quality without issue (limited frame rate generally frees up more processing power for higher settings). If it is causing that many issues for you then I would suspect something to be wrong with your machine, not with vsync.
  • 15 Hide
    CaedenV , May 18, 2012 5:24 PM
    The difference between AMD and nVidia is not so much the track record of driver related bugs (although it seems that AMD does have a few more than nVidia), but that nVidia has a good and relatively prompt response to issues, while AMD is not nearly as up front about their problems, or as prompt about making fixes.
Other Comments
    Display all 68 comments.
  • 26 Hide
    julianbautista87 , May 18, 2012 5:23 PM
    that's for those who said that AMD's drivers suck. I have a hd 6850 and I haven't had the first driver issue.
  • 15 Hide
    CaedenV , May 18, 2012 5:24 PM
    The difference between AMD and nVidia is not so much the track record of driver related bugs (although it seems that AMD does have a few more than nVidia), but that nVidia has a good and relatively prompt response to issues, while AMD is not nearly as up front about their problems, or as prompt about making fixes.
  • 7 Hide
    super-smashman , May 18, 2012 5:25 PM
    I always use the Framerate Target in EVGA PrecisionX instead of v-sync.
  • 18 Hide
    CaedenV , May 18, 2012 5:26 PM
    knipedVsync frequently makes a game unplayable with a mouse anyways so who does this really affect?

    what are you talking about? Vsync is great for reducing screen tearing issues, and helping up the graphical quality without issue (limited frame rate generally frees up more processing power for higher settings). If it is causing that many issues for you then I would suspect something to be wrong with your machine, not with vsync.
  • 0 Hide
    monsta , May 18, 2012 5:45 PM
    I have absolutely no stuttering with my GTX 680, it performs incredibly well.
  • 11 Hide
    kartu , May 18, 2012 5:47 PM
    Careful when talking about "600 series": 630 is a rebranded 440. (there are also crapo "600" series 610 and 620)
  • 0 Hide
    dgingeri , May 18, 2012 5:56 PM
    I've noticed it on my GTX680, but it's so rare and doesn't disturb anything, so I just ignore it.
  • 1 Hide
    spookyman , May 18, 2012 6:01 PM
    Hmm wonder if they will actually produce more 680 and 690 cards?
  • 6 Hide
    atikkur , May 18, 2012 6:20 PM
    was it regular vsync or adaptive vsync that affected? and do pre 600 series affected too? (500,400,200,9,8,7,6,fx,4,3,2,tnt?)
  • 4 Hide
    blazorthon , May 18, 2012 6:24 PM
    atikkurwas it regular vsync or adaptive vsync that affected? and do pre 600 series affected too? (500,400,200,9,8,7,6,fx,4,3,2,tnt?)


    I think that the problem is isolated to the GTX 600 cards and most likely just the Kepler cards of that series, the Fermi GTX 600 cards are probably not affected.
  • 7 Hide
    ewood , May 18, 2012 6:36 PM
    caedenvwhat are you talking about? Vsync is great for reducing screen tearing issues, and helping up the graphical quality without issue (limited frame rate generally frees up more processing power for higher settings). If it is causing that many issues for you then I would suspect something to be wrong with your machine, not with vsync.


    how does v sync free up resources? because it limits the frame rate? if you up the settings beyond what your graphics card is capable of the frame rate will dip below the v sync frequency. v sync is meant to eliminate screen tearing and in no way does it free up resources
  • 12 Hide
    Anonymous , May 18, 2012 6:36 PM
    what a difference in attitude between talking about this and talking about the amd texture issue a month ago. clear bias for nvidia on this site
  • -3 Hide
    blazorthon , May 18, 2012 6:42 PM
    jon_bwhat a difference in attitude between talking about this and talking about the amd texture issue a month ago. clear bias for nvidia on this site


    Complete lie and you know it. There was no bias in how Tom's did that AMD article and there is no bias in this one. In fact, Tom's clearly says that Nvidia's message was not very reassuring whereas AMD fixed their problem before Tom's addressed it, so if there is any bias, it'd against Nvidia, not against AMD. Fail troll is fail.
  • 14 Hide
    Landsharkk , May 18, 2012 6:45 PM
    ewoodhow does v sync free up resources? because it limits the frame rate? if you up the settings beyond what your graphics card is capable of the frame rate will dip below the v sync frequency. v sync is meant to eliminate screen tearing and in no way does it free up resources


    Actually it does free-up resources. If a GPU is able to constantly provide above 60FPS in your game, then it could free up some resources when turning v-sync on. A GPU working with no v-sync will most likely be at or near 100% utilization. However, with v-sync enabled the GPU might then be working at 75% utilization (because it has no need to try and render at 61+ FPS).

    The real question is, how do you take advantage of the extra resources in the GPU when you have v-sync enabled.
  • -1 Hide
    blazorthon , May 18, 2012 6:54 PM
    LandsharkkActually it does free-up resources. If a GPU is able to constantly provide above 60FPS in your game, then it could free up some resources when turning v-sync on. A GPU working with no v-sync will most likely be at or near 100% utilization. However, with v-sync enabled the GPU might then be working at 75% utilization (because it has no need to try and render at 61+ FPS). The real question is, how do you take advantage of the extra resources in the GPU when you have v-sync enabled.


    The only resources that would not be used would be parts of the GPU that then can't do anything else. For example, some cores might either idle or not work as hard, but what can you do about it? What would they be used for if you could take advantage of them? They might be needed to be held in reserve to keep FPS over 60 during intensive parts of a game or whatever.

    Basically, even if they could be used for something else, they might not be usable for the game (or whatever) that is running on the other cores when it needs more resources for a few particularly heavy frames and then frame rate drops and V-Sync might take things down from 60FPS to 30FPS. Adaptive V-Sync should fix that, but as of right now, Nvidia is obviously having problems (the whole point of this article), so maybe it's just not worth the trouble.
  • -4 Hide
    whimseh , May 18, 2012 7:04 PM
    Not noticing any stuttering at all with my GTX 680.
  • -7 Hide
    jasonpwns , May 18, 2012 7:08 PM
    LandsharkkActually it does free-up resources. If a GPU is able to constantly provide above 60FPS in your game, then it could free up some resources when turning v-sync on. A GPU working with no v-sync will most likely be at or near 100% utilization. However, with v-sync enabled the GPU might then be working at 75% utilization (because it has no need to try and render at 61+ FPS). The real question is, how do you take advantage of the extra resources in the GPU when you have v-sync enabled.


    I always get a lower frame-rate when I enable v-sync than when I disable it.
  • 1 Hide
    blazorthon , May 18, 2012 7:16 PM
    whimsehNot noticing any stuttering at all with my GTX 680.


    Different hardware and software specs will effect whether or not there is stutter and different people will effect whether or not they can see it even if it is three, so of course not everyone will have the same experience with it. The fact that so many customers are experiencing it shows that there is a problem because it shouldn't be happening, especially to a large amount of customers.

    jasonpwnsI always get a lower frame-rate when I enable v-sync than when I disable it.


    That helps to prove Landsharkk partially right. His/her point was that there are fewer resources in use when you enable V-Sync and if you get a lower frame rate from enabling V-Sync, that is evidence supporting his/her claim because it is usually safe to assume that by enabling V-Sync, the lower frame rate is caused by less utilization of the GPU's resources because it isn't wasting resources by trying to get a frame rate that is above what the monitor can display.
Display more comments