Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

G-Sync Kit for Asus VG248QE Monitor Available for $200

By - Source: via Asus | B 71 comments

Ready for some DIY?

You might remember back in December when we gave away five Nvidia G-Sync upgrade kits for Asus’ VG248QE monitor. The kit allows users with a VG248QE monitor and a compatible GeForce card to upgrade their monitor to include G-Sync support. A month later, those of you who weren’t lucky enough to win one of the five kits we got from Nvidia to give away are finally able to purchase the kit from Nvidia directly.

The company on Wednesday announced that the kit is now on sale priced at $199. This is quite a bit more than the estimated value we got from Nvidia when running the contest ($100), but if you want it, you at least know where you can get it.

To help you install the kit, Nvidia’s put together an awesome instructional video. Check it out below. And remember, don’t try this at home unless you’re sure you know what you’re doing, and you’re comfortable doing this kind of work yourself.

Nvidia G-Sync DIY Kit Installation

Follow Jane McEntegart @JaneMcEntegart. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

Discuss
Display all 71 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 10 Hide
    whiteodian , January 17, 2014 9:15 AM
    They are out of their minds. Too much money to possibly destroy a monitor. I'll wait for the tech to be widely available at lower prices.
Other Comments
  • 10 Hide
    whiteodian , January 17, 2014 9:15 AM
    They are out of their minds. Too much money to possibly destroy a monitor. I'll wait for the tech to be widely available at lower prices.
  • 8 Hide
    CaptainTom , January 17, 2014 9:18 AM
    Yay proprietary stuff that is overpriced, restrictive, and lightly supported! Hey Nvidia is consistant... Ya gotta give them that!
  • 2 Hide
    zanny , January 17, 2014 9:25 AM
    So I think I'm just waiting for variable refresh rate DisplayPort 1.4 monitors, thanks.
  • 4 Hide
    firefoxx04 , January 17, 2014 9:51 AM
    or wait for AMD freesync and see how it stacks up. alot of monitors support it.
  • -5 Hide
    somebodyspecial , January 17, 2014 9:58 AM
    Quote:
    Yay proprietary stuff that is overpriced, restrictive, and lightly supported! Hey Nvidia is consistant... Ya gotta give them that!


    No surprise, NV now knows where AMD is with this. A product not even planned for market (freesync). So why not cash in on the REAL mccoy?

    The difference between your beloved free crap company is over the last 10yrs AMD has lost $6Billion+ while NV has made 3B+. The difference is, AMD appears in to not understand you run a business to make money :)  NV gets it.

    And for all the whining about over priced stuff...NV hasn't made what they did in 2007 for 6yrs. They aren't charging enough, and AMD isn't even on the right playing field. AMD would be charging a premium for EVERY single part they make if they could. It's comic you think any business is your friend. They are not. I hope AMD starts charging more before they go bankrupt.
    http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/financial-statements?symbol=US%3aAMD
    10yr summary. That's what you get when you don't act like a business, or can't seem to run one right. Take a LONG look then come back and say why AMD is charging too little to survive. Look at the shares outstanding too...LOL. Talk about screwing investors. Shares have been diluted to half in the last 10yrs. They are essentially operating like our govt, printing money they don't have to survive. In another few years AMD may owe $300-400mil per year before paying just INTEREST on their debt (now 200mil). What then sherlock? At some point it becomes nearly impossible to make a buck! At some point people will fear your stock, which leaves you with less to keep up operations, R&D etc etc. At some point your idea of running a business, ends with the business being run into the ground.

    Wake up. Quit asking AMD to kill themselves for you. They will likely lose money YET AGAIN this year. Consoles or not, which won't make them more than ~400mil even if they are freaky awesome sellers for 12 months - like pre-order style/black friday xmas all year - never gonna happen but even then won't make them rich. Freesync makes AMD how much if it get standard? Gsync just dropped a $100 profit bomb. We already know they can do it for $100 as shown by the monitors with it inside. Outside shouldn't be $200 clearly gouging because...wait for it...

    They are a business out to make money...ROFL. Freesync is the shareware version of the real thing ;)  You get what you pay for...Which in this case is NOTHING (freesync is vaporware on desktops today). I'll take something that works NOW.
  • 0 Hide
    NJChester , January 17, 2014 10:07 AM
    nvidia LOL.
  • 0 Hide
    krobjack , January 17, 2014 10:24 AM
    @Somebodyspecial:Wow, you're so enlightened. There is a fine line between making a profit and raping consumers. Nvidia loves the latter. You sound like a fanboy who will defend them at all cost (literally) though, so I won't waste any more time here.
  • 4 Hide
    CraigN , January 17, 2014 10:39 AM
    Quote:
    Yay proprietary stuff that is overpriced, restrictive, and lightly supported! Hey Nvidia is consistant... Ya gotta give them that!


    Lightly supported? If you mean just the one monitor for now, yes, it's lightly supported right now, but as far as actual use goes once you have it, no games need to have it baked in, so once you have it, everything supports it. That's a pretty sweet deal if you ask me.

    Ordered one this week and put it in. It shipped from Houston so I got it in a day. Installation wasn't all that bad/unsafe as people are worried about. Hardest part was getting the monitor open, everything else was easy peasy. Loving it so far!
  • -1 Hide
    Phillip Wager , January 17, 2014 10:42 AM
    what i don't understand is the whole concept behind Gsync assumeing you are building a new system why spend the extra hundreds of dollars for a gsync monitor or a gysnc upgrade to have better visuals at sub 60hz when you can spend it on faster hardware that can keep framerate over 60fps? or even if you are upgrading you can spend that extra money on an upgrade 300 bucks gets you a 2nd gtx 770 wich is the slowest video card that supports gsync or 300 bucks is the difference between a 780 and a 780ti or a 780ti and a titan? i just don't see how G-sync has any value considering it is designed with slow hardware in mind??
  • 0 Hide
    red77star , January 17, 2014 10:58 AM
    This is a reason why i have AMD former ATI video cards which in Crossfire setup work perfectly good.
  • 0 Hide
    CraigN , January 17, 2014 10:59 AM
    It's not designed with "slow hardware in mind." You can still get tearing (just harder to notice, some people are more sensitive to it) at 60+ fps/60+ Hz, with Vsync off, so it's not designed for "sub 60Hz" or "under 60 fps". And Vsync On to remove the tearing introduces input lag. This has neither con.

    Also, the minimum requirements are a 650Ti Boost, not a 770.
  • 4 Hide
    gggplaya , January 17, 2014 11:06 AM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    Yay proprietary stuff that is overpriced, restrictive, and lightly supported! Hey Nvidia is consistant... Ya gotta give them that!
    No surprise, NV now knows where AMD is with this. A product not even planned for market (freesync). So why not cash in on the REAL mccoy?The difference between your beloved free crap company is over the last 10yrs AMD has lost $6Billion+ while NV has made 3B+. The difference is, AMD appears in to not understand you run a business to make money :)  NV gets it.And for all the whining about over priced stuff...NV hasn't made what they did in 2007 for 6yrs. They aren't charging enough, and AMD isn't even on the right playing field. AMD would be charging a premium for EVERY single part they make if they could. It's comic you think any business is your friend. They are not. I hope AMD starts charging more before they go bankrupt.http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/financial-statements?symbol=US%3aAMD10yr summary. That's what you get when you don't act like a business, or can't seem to run one right. Take a LONG look then come back and say why AMD is charging too little to survive. Look at the shares outstanding too...LOL. Talk about screwing investors. Shares have been diluted to half in the last 10yrs. They are essentially operating like our govt, printing money they don't have to survive. In another few years AMD may owe $300-400mil per year before paying just INTEREST on their debt (now 200mil). What then sherlock? At some point it becomes nearly impossible to make a buck! At some point people will fear your stock, which leaves you with less to keep up operations, R&D etc etc. At some point your idea of running a business, ends with the business being run into the ground.Wake up. Quit asking AMD to kill themselves for you. They will likely lose money YET AGAIN this year. Consoles or not, which won't make them more than ~400mil even if they are freaky awesome sellers for 12 months - like pre-order style/black friday xmas all year - never gonna happen but even then won't make them rich. Freesync makes AMD how much if it get standard? Gsync just dropped a $100 profit bomb. We already know they can do it for $100 as shown by the monitors with it inside. Outside shouldn't be $200 clearly gouging because...wait for it...They are a business out to make money...ROFL. Freesync is the shareware version of the real thing ;)  You get what you pay for...Which in this case is NOTHING (freesync is vaporware on desktops today). I'll take something that works NOW.
    That's not APPLES to APPLES here. Nvidia has made money in the mobile(TEGRA) marketspace, as well as in the graphics cards space. AMD has lost boatloads in the CPU(their main productline) marketplace, losing out bigtime to intel's monopoly on the space with increasingly better processors. AMD's, or should i say ATI's has had a pretty good offering in the graphics realm, i really doubt most of their loses are from the graphics devision.
  • 7 Hide
    xomm , January 17, 2014 11:40 AM
    Might as well just add that $200 to your GPU budget and not have to worry about mediocre frame rates in the first place?!
  • 0 Hide
    iknowhowtofixit , January 17, 2014 12:02 PM
    Where's MouseMonkey and all of the other nice people who argued with me about this? I desperately need their input as to why this $200 add-on is essential for gaming and more cost effective than a GPU upgrade.
  • 2 Hide
    colson79 , January 17, 2014 12:07 PM
    $200, G-sync will be a complete failure at these prices.
  • 0 Hide
    CraigN , January 17, 2014 12:41 PM
    Quote:
    650 ti BOOST. The 650 ti has no display port.


    Whoops. Thanks for catching me there. Edited for correctness!
  • 1 Hide
    eklipz330 , January 17, 2014 1:04 PM
    $200? are you out of your mind? this is gonna go the same way as physx
  • 1 Hide
    ZippyPinhead , January 17, 2014 2:06 PM
    Quote:
    or wait for AMD freesync and see how it stacks up. alot of monitors support it.
    Plan on waiting a long time......YEARS. AMD's "free sync" isn't going to be available for performance desktop setups. There is a BIG Reason WHY they showed a very early demo on a LAPTOP. Do some research.

  • 0 Hide
    nukemaster , January 17, 2014 2:11 PM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    or wait for AMD freesync and see how it stacks up. alot of monitors support it.
    Plan on waiting a long time......YEARS. AMD's "free sync" isn't going to be available for performance desktop setups. There is a BIG Reason WHY they showed a very early demo on a LAPTOP. Do some research.


    Because they have variable refresh rate as a power saving option. AMD uses this for its demo.

    It all depends on the screens controller board.
  • -1 Hide
    10tacle , January 17, 2014 2:15 PM
    Quote:
    AMD has lost boatloads in the CPU (their main productline) marketplace, losing out bigtime to intel's monopoly on the space with increasingly better processors. AMD's, or should i say ATI's has had a pretty good offering in the graphics realm, i really doubt most of their loses are from the graphics devision.


    Just so you know, Intel doesn't have a monopoly on the CPU market BECAUSE of AMD being present. The fact that AMD has now missed the mark on TWO generations of CPUs while watching Intel march forward is not Intel's fault! I agree with that poster and AMD's failed profit making. WHERE they fail in profit making is irrelevant.

    The last AMD card(s) I had were two 4870s in Crossfire. The Catalyst drivers gave me fits. I finally upgraded to a single Nvidia GPU alternative of the next generation and never looked back.
Display more comments