Tom's Hardware Readers Pit G-Sync Vs FreeSync In Weekend Battle

Last week, on a rare rainy Saturday in Southern California, about 50 readers joined Tom's Hardware at Newegg's Hybrid Center for a hands-on showdown between AMD's FreeSync and Nvidia's G-Sync, the two variable refresh rate technologies that have begun showing up in monitors with great frequency. We've been testing those monitors and evolving our methodologies, which you'll see in some upcoming reviews, but because the artifacts of variable frame rates on fixed display refresh rates are best seen with the naked eye, we needed some naked eyes.

In the coming weeks we will publish an in-depth analysis of FreeSync, written by Filippo Scognamiglio. Filippo penned our initial preview of G-Sync about 18 months ago, and it's time to give FreeSync its turn. And finally, we will provide the results of our reader testing from Saturday's event in an article written by Chris Angelini. That piece will not only tell you which technology won the battle, but it will crawl beneath the surface of that answer, because sometimes the most interesting nuggets are as tasty as truffles, and require just as much digging.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
TOPICS
Fritz Nelson is Editor-at-Large of Tom's Hardware US.
  • AndrewJacksonZA
    I'm excited to read the full article... :-)
    Reply
  • ubercake
    The outcome of this "experiment" could very well determine the future graphics cards in my main gaming machine...

    I can't wait to read about the event.
    Reply
  • virtualban
    My problem with these technologies is how our brain adapts. In the end the most popular technology will look better subjectively despite how it stands objectively, if they are dissimilar enough to each other.

    I remember a few years ago pushing the limits of my computer and having a game running at 12 to 17 fps, which got used to and did not see a slide show.
    Reply
  • xenol
    How about this: why do we need refresh rates and vertical syncing anymore? These are just carry-overs from when we were using display technologies that actually needed to refresh.

    LCDs, OLEDs, quantum dots, these all no longer need to refresh. We should be able to just directly change the pixel rather as fast as its response time allows rather than just waiting on some "synching" and redraw the whole thing. We should just get rid of the concept of refreshing in monitors. It would make G-Sync and Freesync a moot point.
    Reply
  • Math Geek
    on the edge of my seat waiting for the articles.......
    Reply
  • quilciri
    Saw the headline for this article. Got Breakfast and coffee. Eagerly sat down to enjoy bacon and the endgame results. Am blue-balled. Discovered it is in fact possible to eat bacon morosely.
    Reply
  • AndrewJacksonZA
    @quilciri: Breakfast? Coffee? C'mon son, it's past 4:30 PM - home time now! :-)
    Reply
  • xaephod
    I was hoping this was the comparison.
    Reply
  • FritzEiv
    Sorry @quilciri and @xaephod. I tried to make the headline in such a way that you wouldn't think it was the results. I guess I failed in that. Next time I'll put "(These are not the results)" in the headline :-)
    Reply
  • husker
    I'd like to know if there is any kind of objective test to see how well freesync/gsync are actually working. For instance, someone may think the FPS is better or worse but a quick fraps test will tell the real story. How do I get a hard nosed, objective, "just the facts, ma'am" handle on the (supposedly) varying refresh rate of my monitor?
    Reply