Just to let you know Linus, this video is excellent. You've really come on since your earlier uploads, your commentary is excellent and there's just the right amount of info. Thanks for the videos.
Not positive, but I think that he probably uses the audio of one recording and the visuals of the other. Thus the lack of audio changing when it goes from construction back to linus.
People didn't care much about SSD because it doesn't actually affect gameplay, only load times. Also, SSD made a huge compromise in capacity, this g-sync doesn't seem to have any compromises.
It effects gameplay. The data transfer is alot faster then harddisk , which should cause output to have much lesser delay. In exact same way to transfer rates. But even harddisk does this so fast, the delay should be unnoticable on both situations.
Crispy Zeal The thing is so many applications don't have onerous load-times, they test a rig because of graphical fidelity, resolution and frame-rate demands. SSD is obviously better, but at such a cost in price and capacity, I think many would rather take the inconvenience of slightly longer load times.
Well both G-Sync and SSD don't really have anything worse than current normal monitors and HDD they are just both more expensive, I don't really see what you mean that price is a compromise on SSD but not on G-Sync.
I could not go back to not having operating system at least on an ssd. I don't put games on my ssd due to limited capacity compared to size of games worth it but I out os and software such as video editing and photo editing software that normally take ages to load and such.
I had to create and use a partition on my Seagate Barracuda 2TB SATA III drive around the beginning of the year for an AOMEI Partition Assistant tutorial I had to produce - migrating from a HDD to SSD. I wanted to cry, and I was glad to get the tutorial over with so I could go back to using my OCZ Vertex 4 128GB. I hate having to work on other people's computers that don't have SSDs.
I currently bought an SSD. When I didn't have it. I was like "It's too expensive, it doesn't hurt to wait an extra 2 minutes every loading time". Now I have my SSD. And it litteraly became a habit. I cannot use normal HDD computers too slow for me. Especially as a computer scientist, an SSD is now for me a MUST HAVE. I never even have think twice about rebooting because it's so fast. I exactly know what you mean.
The difference I experienced when adding an SSD into my computer was and still is astounding. I literally notice when even a small file is being accessed from my hard drives and not my SSD. It's THAT big of a difference. If you haven't bought an SSD then treat yourself cause they're amazing and its Christmas :DDDD
So I upgraded my Dell Inspiron 17r Special Edition to an SSD and put the 1TB HDD in the other drive. The difference in boot time is HUGE and loading times for some of my bigger games are tiny. I really notice when I play League of Legends on my laptop, because I usually have to wait quite a long time for everyone else
Let's say I have 2 non g-sync monitors and I connect a g-sync compatible monitor, will I not be able to use the other 2 monitors because I have g-sync enabled on my g-sync monitor? Or will I be able to use g-sync on 1 monitor while the other 2 are not running g-sync?
My honest opinion and thoughts: I would really want to see G-Sync available on all monitors as a standalone. The fact that it has to be built for certain monitors only, means that we're seriously limited in what we can buy with the technology within it. For example: I game on my LG IPS234V - it has 5ms response time, which is fine by me and has absolutely beautiful picture viewing colours. I wouldn't sacrifice the IPS panel in it for a TN one. I won't ever consider TN ever again - so with that in mind, why would I consider G-Sync if it is only built on certain monitors (looks like TN only). That's my main thoughts about it. I understand the principle and really admire the step forward in gaming. It is a great invention and use of several technologies in one. For very serious gamers I think G-Sync should be a must buy.
Linus, congrats on your work, this channel is just awesome...i learn so much, and the fact of you guys give true opinions makes it even better! Keep up the awesome work (Linus + rest of the team =) )
This kind of informative vid is what I love to see Linus. I haven't gotten an SSD yet but just going from Windows XP to 8 was a speed boost that amazed me. Given that an SSD will make even more of a difference, one or 2 will definetly be going into a build since the prices have come down.
Can G-SYNC be adapted to existing displays or do you have to purchase a special display that supports it? Because that will be a deal breaker for me since I don't use PC monitors as my displays. Also I would take 120 - 144hz over this if I had to buy a new screen since in the long run I think it would feel smoother.
Only that one ASUS monitor can be "Upgraded" to support G-sync. Otherwise you'll have to buy a new monitor with G-sync supported. Personally, I'll wait until there's a good 1440p, 120hz G-sync monitor :P
you dont use PC monitors as displays? so you like more 1080p 46" crap TVs? one day your eyes will bleed ... I yet have to see a big TV which will not make me motion sick and my eyes hurt.
ZomWomProductions Well since AMD offers products with similar performance but much cheaper, yes, they have lost their edge when it comes to gamers on a budget.
Just purchased a $570 2560x1440 monitor ... when that wears out then sure I'll look for a G-Sync monitor and hopefully there will also be 120/144 Hz 'IPS/PLS' panels with > HD (1920x1080) by then.
G-Sync on TVs? Hell yeah! Exactly what I was hoping for. I just hope the next revision of HDMI, possibly HDMI 2.5 or 3.0 will fully support this technology and I hope set top-boxes, consoles and appliances like these will soon get G-Sync support in their internal graphics cards. Wouldn't be bad on smartphones and tablets either, although we don't experience stuttering, lag and tearing on these particular devices that much. I'm assuming this could be used also in any desktop and laptop, even if not for gaming, to eliminate any frame-drop related issue and such.
This is just groundbreaking tech guys ... i watched Linus' livestream when it was first anounced and i really can't wait to witness it come to the customer hands ...
yeah, I dunno why Linux is like "wow, just think in a few years from now we won't be able to live without G-sync" because sure, I was pretty interested in it, but I lost most of my interest when I found out I needed both, a (decent) Nvidia card and monitor, I'm sure most of us like the monitor/TV we have now, so I personally don't see a reason to get a new one even if I did already have a good Nvidia card.
I have followed G-Sync as well as Mantle and all the other bits and bobs of the tech pipe, and with all that taken into account I will not be worrying about this tech at all, it will just be a matter of years before even this is phased out and monitors are able to do this no matter the brand of GPU. Lets face it and be honest that is what we want, buying into G-Sync locks you into a specific vendor I don't believe Nvidia will allow ATI to milk any of this they are already looking at a struggle IF Mantle ends up being as good as we all want it to be. That is not to say G-Sync is not exciting tech or news, but for me it is exciting for from the technical standpoint of what is soon to come not particularly because of what will be available soon. Just remember what Linus said " Nvidia may have a hard time selling this" we are certainly used to what we deal with now ATI will have a response to this maybe not next year but it will come if not an entire hardware standard soon after. Linus knows this as well as other people who are able to see more than 10 feet in front of them. Oh and before I forget Linus, yes I do own an SSD "Corsair Force GT" absolutely no-way I will use a HDD for the main OS unless its under critical circumstances, its damn painful enough using other peoples HDD's when fixing their issues because 8/10 the computer is a decade older than the tech I am used too before we even take HDD speed into consideration. As always good show!
i agree and it will probably go the same way as 10-bit output on video cards to be honest about it as yeah it exsists but unless anything affordable runs with it it will not be popular and 10-bit monitor inputs are not affordable nor do i see G-Sync monitors being either. In this i would want to see a 10-bit monitor with G-Sync so it displays all the frames at the highest defition of color space with minimal to no frame deleteing, frame tearing, etc.
yumri4 Well that's right, you look back a year ago "Wide Gamut" IPS displays were a hot topic but they cost in a lot of cases 2x as much as a standard IPS which already costed between $800-$1000 and they had some drawbacks such as applications were not guaranteed to support them 100% which resulted in odd colour reproduction in same cases. It is only in 2013 that the better of the IPS displays are becoming affordable and 1920 resolutions cost as little as $160 for an LCD-LED backlit display. Most notable is ASUS's slim bezel displays in the 27" size bracket come using AH-IPS for around $450 (www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=558_1368&products_id=22547), IPS took time to flourish and by the time it made it's way into mainstream users it already been surpassed with better panels. Their is a far better chance that streaming locally and VR will go mainstream before G-Sync ever will. VR with the RIFT is coming in at an excellent sub $300 price point which is pretty much spot on for mainstream consumer buyers.
I agree on the solid state drive thing. Any computer that isn't using an SSD annoys the hell out of me. I'll be buying one of these as soon as possible.
Anyone who claims they have never noticed screen tearing with Vsync disabled needs to go to an opticians and get their eyes tested. Yes, screen tearing occurs less often on 120 hz and 144 hz monitors but it definitely still happens. Also, to these people that claim they don't get screen tearing, I recommend you get stuck into BF4 multiplayer. Considering your eyes have tuning issues you would be right at home in BF4 multiplayer because what you shoot at in that game is not exactly where your bullets are going!
nVidia needs to license this technology to Intel, so it'll be compatible with Optimus. It would be nice if they'd open it up to AMD too but if I know nVidia at all, I don't think they will. Which is a pity, because a strong AMD means Intel and nVidia can't rest on their laurels. Nice explanation of G-Sync, btw, Linus. I find it odd how not that many people can imagine the benefits of this technology. If ever I build a desktop pc (probably in the not too distant future) I'd definitely go for G-Sync.
I don't think it will become the same as the case of SSDs because it only works for NVIDA cards. If they want it to sell it should work for all/ as many graphics cards as possible.
That's the thing though. NVIDIA does want it to sell. NVIDIA is a corporation. At the end of the day, profit is what matters. It makes little sense from a financial standpoint to offer revolutionary technology to your competition. This will add to the list of reasons for purchasing NVIDIA products instead of AMD products. Little things like this could lead to people who switch to NVIDIA never going back to AMD. Good for business (on NVIDIA's end) but bad for the consumer for a number of reasons.
Thomas Berselli yay economics. its also good for consumers in other ways - patents encourage innovation that is to be delivered to consumers. no cake and eat it too. still sucks in those other ways tho. damn give and take
I used an SSD for my Windows 7 boot drive for about a year before I wanted to do a reinstall of W7. I'd gotten a bit tired of managing the three partitions that I'd ended up with, so I just decided to save the SSD for an Xubuntu install. I can't wait to get another SSD to replace my hard drive. Even though it's 7200RPM, everything feels unresponsive compared to the SSDs performance. Awesome explanation of G-sync, guys! :D
I dont know if the SSD example is a good one for comparison. I feel SSD vs HDD offer so MUCH more, where g-sync sure is great, but dont offer the big jump that SSD vs HDD was.
I made the switch to SSD when 240gb drives went below $300 and it was the best upgrade I've made to my PC besides my video card. Apps open almost instantaneous. Restarts around 10 seconds or less. Going back to a HDD would be so painful. There's no way. As I already have a Kepler card, I'm extremely excited about G-Sync. In ACIV right now I basically have two options. Vsync off and horrific tearing, or Vsync on and terrible stutter. I've heard claims that 40fps with Gsync looks smoother than 55fps on a 60hz monitor, and it makes sense. I can't wait.
All these new Monitor upgrades, I mean; 4k Resolution, 144hz, 3d capability, and now g-sync. I mean Yeah great, awesome super cool. However they are not in the average consumers budget. Moving onto the question which was asked in this video, with regards to SSDs. While I have an SSD [Samsung 840PRO 128GB] I find it is fast but I don't find it necessary or can't live without. I only upgraded because I was running a 4 year old 5400RPM Seagate Sata III, which had a read and write of approximately 60-70mb/s. I believe I'll upgrade my monitors [S273HL and G245H], when G-sync/High fresh/Ultra Definition monitors become standard, and they have flushed out the current standard 1920x1080 60Hz.
Well most things aren't in the average consumer budgets when they first come out, and if anything the price of new tech decreases faster now then at any time that I can remember, so I don't see that as an issue.
John Patz While they are decreasing in price, it will take a few years before a monitor with a few or all of these features will be the price of a standard 1920x1080 24" 60Hz 2013.
Base on the information, G-SYNC equals to a monitor with no tearing at high fps, no stuttering in low fps and no input lag. Even with only the game runs only 30fps, the animation should theoretically still be buttery smooth.
Going from SSD to HDD does make a difference. I was used to loging in to my PC which took 7sec rather than the 25sec w/ HHD. Applications were brought up faster, as well as it was totally silent. Once you go SSD, its really hard to go back, esp when its running your OS on there. Really excited to hear more about the G-Sync, esp the Cost range.
A quick question.. How will this work on consoles? Cause I have my PC and my Wii U plugged into the same monitor, will G-Sync have any effect on my Wii U? Or will I even be able to plug in my wii u?
I've got a SSD for about a year now i think and it is really so good! my neighbour will get one for christmas now but all this time when we meet we could actually drink a coffee while booting. I also don't really need to care about autostart applications because it's just fast all the time. And on top of this I just got win8.1 while he still uses 7. After the bios screen I'm up in 9 secs, insane guys!
Firstly i can't live with a system that doesn't have an SSD as the boot drive anymore. And secondly, if i can buy a G-Sync monitor with 2.5k res, it's not a bloody TN panel and it is at least 27", i don't care what it costs i am buying it no matter what. Because that's how much i hate tearing and having to use V-Sync in every other game to try and reduce it with the cost of lag and it still sometimes feels laggy even if i see fraps reporting steady 60 FPS.
AMD being given license by Nvidia to make Gsync available in their graphic cards? yeah i dont think that's going to happen giving their competitors one of their technologies it's like microsoft giving Sony license to make Halo games available in PS4 or PS3 platforms
It would only serve to make Nvidia more money. Because, if Nvidia licensed G-Sync to AMD, then every G-Sync card AMD sells would have to pay a royalty to Nvidia.
Otto Knabe Yea, that was my point as in the fact that Sony lets it's main competitor use their technology would be a better analogy than Sony getting halo
buyed a 840 evo for my top rig, switched to the laptop because the improvement on the main was just not worth, barely noticeable. But on the laptop the improvement was simply outstanding, now responding as fast as the main rig
I have an SSD in my pc and when I have to do work on school computers I want to punch a wall. There decent PCs but it feels like an hour just to load programs and boot the pc
If only AMD and Nvidia could hold hands and sing we are the world. We could have Mantle across the board, G-Sync would work with every GPU, TrueAudio would be a free download for everyone and maybe Physx Support for every card too.
Mantle is open-source. However, if that happened, that would be nothing short of catastrophic. There would be no reason other than fanboyism to buy a R9 290 over a 780. There would be no competition. Maybe cooling solutions would be better for one, but other than that, there would be no incentives for you to buy from one company than the other, and therefore there would be no competition in prices, and so prices for Graphics Cards would shoot through the roof.
G-sync is great in theory...BUT, i will not buy another monitor just for that, i will not pay extra for a feature that will only work on an nvidia GPU, i can however get a 120hz monitor with a 290x/780 and run the games at 120FPS with adaptive vsync. Doesn't that sound better from a buyer's perspective?
Your brain won't say the same when it sees a really nice mixture of ugly tearing and terrible stuttering. You might think you don't see it but it's there and it's ridiculous. "In theory"? You don't get it so it's a theory? Nice. The biggest problem of G-Sync is not the cost, it's the fact that PEOPLE JUST DON'T GET IT.
kdawgmaster You don't expect it to be free, do you? It's a new technology and everybody went crazy about the price. Sure, with that amount of money you can just turn V-Sync on and don't worry about anything, no tearing, no stuttering, a bit lag. If you turn off V-Sync and don't see any tearing, go check your eyes asap, seriously. G-Sync makes the most sense when you can't push out consistently more than 60FPS at the settings that you like. And if you're planing to get a 120/144Hz monitor or later on when you grab a-freaking-demanding-next-title game, that's a different story.
Once prices drop a bit a G-Sync monitor makes far more sense. Since gaming at 50FPS with G-Sync is very smooth with minimal lag you don't need nearly the same Graphics and CPU power to run at 120FPS+ to maintain a mostly 120FPS synched experience. Let's say a card costs $300 that runs the latest games at 50FPS average, and it's $800 to run the same games at mostly 120FPS. That's $500 difference! So if building a new system it CAN make a lot of sense to spend slightly more on a G-Sync monitor and less on the CPU/Graphics, or just graphics. (This technology would also improve the console experience a lot. Since Sony makes HDTV's and the PS4 it would be awesome to see them license this from NVidia as it's only a driver issue on the GPU side. You'd have to try it side-by-side but it would be a noticeably better experience.)
Really? 7:00 "Let's take a look at why I believe this will be extremely hard for nVidia to sell" ... not exactly "the way it's meant to be played", is it?
Happy Grass There have only been articles which all seem to match the vague 'Fall 2014' announced by BenQ. I'm sure it will be worth the wait and costs though. :)
Thing is NVidia have spent years developing this solution, they aren't going to just give it up so easy. Maybe when they have recovered most of the development cost they might licence it to AMD. However if AMD were smart (which I believe they are), they will be working on their own version. NVidia have given them enough information to work out a solution of their own after all.
My main system uses a 840 pro, which as of yesterday I now have running with RAPID and my work station uses a WD Black. I can say without a doubt that having a SSD as the C Drive makes a huge difference, waiting that extra ~ 8 - 10 seconds on bootup is torturous when you just want to get things done in an early morning.
The ASUS VG248QE, the monitor you have, is actually the exact monitor that G-SYNC is available for. If you go to www.geforce.com/hardware/technology/g-sync/where-to-buy and click on Digital Storm or Overlord Computer you can get them to install the G-SYNC module for you.
Great Video Linus! If I had to pick a video that best explains this topic, I would say you nailed it 100%. I am very excited for this technology. It will be another great step forward for gaming.
new PhysX is here...so let's just forget about it and move on. (nVidia user here) When this technology is available in most display devices then we can talk about how great it is compared to old v-sync. The cat is out of the bag and I don't think nVidia can hold exclusivity on how input signal is synced on display.
I'm definitely going to buy a G-Sync monitor but I'm not going to rush out. I'll just get one when I need a new monitor, rather than getting one 'just because'. It'll sell, but it'll be steady.
so does this mean if i were to have a 144hz monitor, that will be the max, but then if i'm running a game at 120FPS it is pretty much 120Hz, if my frames then drop to 100fps it will be at 100hz?
***** Are you serious? That's what G-Sync is about. It automatically changes monitor refresh rate to match your GPU. If you have 120Hz monitor and the game only runs at 45fps the G-Sync equipped monitor will refresh the image 45 times per second (45Hz).
AMD should develop their own refresh rate matching technology. They are already incorporating audio technology in their graphics cards, eliminating the need for sound cards, so it's only a matter of time.
I wouldn't say it eliminates the need for sound cards, because you have never needed a sound card because of on-board audio. But my question is, is the sound performance of these cards on par with a dedicated sound card?
Zachary Turner people seem to misunderstand the function of the amd udio feature, it's not really about sound quality but more about the calculation of sound positioning in game engines wich is something that atm is handled by the cpu
Good analogy with SSDs. I find workstations frustrating, I am just not used to having to wait after booting up the PC. Even opening word is overly noticeable. If g-sync is the same scale of upgrade, I look forward to it... haha
I've had SSD for about a year now and i needed to send it to RMA at one point. I installed my OS to my 1TB HDD and I felt the impact from second one. The installation took longer, the boot took longer, installing the updates took 2x longer. All the games I play took 2-3x longer to load (ex. BF4 loading screens took about 30s-1min) . From that moment I've always said that SSD is the next upgrade to your computer that you want to get. Never back to HDD!
Pc gamers. The master race. The race that consists of gamers that use stereo audio and think they are getting 100 genuine frames per second on a 60 hz monitor. In my opinion, screen tearing makes pc games look worse then last gen console games. The master race that spends thousands on hardware to experience screen tearing and virtual surround sound. I worry about pc gamers sometimes. I'm an avid pc gamer myself by the way. Some people need to wake up and smell the coffee. This same group of pc gamers are probably defending BF4, stating hats its perfectly smooth. Honesty is a beautiful thing. I just wish more people would be honest with themselves. The stupidity and shallow narrow mindset of some of the comments in here baffles me. Stop being so stubborn and acknowledge the fact that G-Sync is a real massive innovation in how we will experience video games. Perfectly smooth animations at all times with no input lag regardless of frame rate. Morpheous would say this to the fanboys and people that so helplessly protect the hardware that they currently own, "FREE YOUR MIND". Gamers and pc gamers the world over should be celebrating and applauding the fact that this technology has finally arrived. Finally the title of "The Master Race" is warranted with technology such as Gsync. Who ever argues my point is either an AMD GPU owner, Nvidia GPU owner that recently invested in non Gsync monitors, or some weird individual that doesn't mind horrible horrid nasty screen tearing. I rest my perfectly put case:D. Honesty hurts, but honesty is beautiful too.
1) Consoles and PC's can both get tearing. The only difference is you can decide if it's on or off on PC. On console that decision was made by the game developer. I watched a video of Diablo 3 and they showed the screen tearing every time it dropped below the 60FPS VSYNC rate (so they use Adaptive VSync like NVidia's feature). 2) 100FPS on a 60Hz monitor does have benefits. It reduces mouse lag even further than 60FPS at 60Hz. But then you get screen tearing. 3) I'm playing games at 2560x1440 with ULTRA settings at 60FPS that look far, far better than on an HDTV and I'm close so it's more immersive as well. Long story short is that there are absolutely NO visual advantages on a console. They are far inferior to a high-end gaming PC. 4) G-SYNC on PC just makes things better yet again. No screen tearing, no lag due to VSYNC, and monitors that can game at 120FPS for far quicker, smoother experiences. Now I think consoles are fine, but I don't get why people post such misinformed information.
This is an old comment but I'm going to point this out here: The reason you don't (typically) see tearing on a console is because the developer has chosen to implement vsync, or some other way to limit the framerate to 60/30. They aren't any different in software terms than a PC, all that matters is the developer's implementation of measures against screen tearing. Furthermore, any associated input lag is typically harder to notice on a controller. You'll notice input lag a lot more with a mouse than a joystick, as the latter typically has slower and smoother movement. Console games force you into one set of settings, and that's it. If you like the way that the game looks and responds, that's great! ...What if you don't? What if you'd rather turn down the visual fidelity to get 60fps and/or a render resolution of 1080p? What if you'd like to turn vsync or other framerate limiters off to run a competitive game at much higher framerates for reduced input lag, even with screen tearing? What if you don't like effects like motion blur or depth of field? What if you want more anti-aliasing? Tough, you're stuck with whatever configuration the developer thinks will generate the best review scores and that's it. I get choice as a PC gamer. I can choose how my game looks. I can choose to run a game with vsync enabled if the engine handles it well and I don't mind the added input lag. Or I can choose to run without it for lower input lag. Or I can try to implement some other framerate limiter, as I do on Skyrim, if the engine doesn't handle vsync well. Or I can spend the hundreds on a high refresh rate and/or gsync monitor to get the best of all worlds. And for the record, not all PC gamers are elitists that will go around proclaiming that we are the "Master Race" and that consoles are terrible. Very few do. Don't stereotype all PC gamers, or even groups of PC gamers with a particular piece of hardware, just because some of them are loud dicks. That would be like me saying that every console gamer is a screaming 10 year old that fucked my mother.
Proud to finally own a Gsync monitor (same monitor in this video) I dont have lots of money, but I was in the market for a new monitor and just happened to have the required hardware to run gsync, so it seemed like the right choice for me.
if amd dosnt then u can expect monitor manufactures to do it them selves. I bet when samsung see's it they will make something then sell it with their current high end panels. My thoughts on Gsync right now is that its not worth the extra 100+ bucks. On every game I play with my set up im always above 60FPS at 1440P and dont get ANY screen tearing at all.
I recently built a PC for myself and put in the Samsung 840 Pro. Coming from a 5400 rpm hdd, it obviously was a big difference. Since I didn't buy the smallest version, I have Windows 8 on it and some games. Skyrim is a really good example. I was talking with my friends about the game when we got to the unfortunate "Fast Travel" spots you encounter sometimes. My friends complained about waiting for the Fast Travel loading screen to end, you teleported you inside a house or just outside the gates of a city. They were saying that it took maybe 20 seconds before they could continue playing. I realised how amazingly fast an SSD is and the fact that I would never go back to a HDD.
yeah.. that's also exactly the problem with G-Sync, I'm glad Linus made me aware of that. once you have something that is significantly better, you often can't really do without anymore, or at least it annoys you. this is a big reason why I don't have a SSD. I was actually getting a little hyped at G-Sync, but when Linus talked about this I knew he was right!
Although today`s monitors don´t support dynamic refresh rates as Gsync does, many of them are able to sync to other rates than just 60 Hz if you force them. So here´s a neat trick for those who are always below 60: Force a refresh rate that matches (or is twice of) the highest stable framerate your rig can run, and hope your screen accepts it. Then enable Vsync. Most games I play will always stay above 40 FPS with fairly high settings, but almost never reach 60FPS. A solid 40 FPS is good enough for me and my slow-paced games, but it doesn´t flow smoothly on a monitor that´s locked to 60Hz. So I used a tweak (search for Custom Resolution Utility) to have the video card output 40Hz and I enabled Vsync. Solid 40 FPS @ 40Hz, no stutter, no tearing. Input lag is usually not an issue when GPU and monitor are in time. Some screens won´t accept 40Hz, but I think most will go down to 50Hz. Tip: DP and VGA seem to be less picky about which refreshrates they accept.
AMD ARE letting nvidia use mantle. It is open technology. Nvidia however is notoriously anti open technology, I find it incredibly hard to believe they will allow AMD to use this.
Well for someone like me who has only recently built a new pc that I don't plan on upgrading for awhile and the only component left to upgrade is my 23" Samsung led non gaming monitor. Gsync compared to things like ssds is going to make me wait for awhile until an affordable option is available. Cuz I picked up my 240gb Samsung Evo up for like $130 around thanksgiving this year. And so the waiting begins.
For now. Just because nVidia is pioneering the technology doesn't mean that it won't become adopted by other companies and widespread. This is something big, it's a forward step for PC gaming...no more tearing, no more stuttering, no more input lag, no downsides! Do you REALLY think nVidia will be able to keep it exclusive to their cards? Obviously getting around patents could be an issue, but if it's something that works, then be rest assured that someone will find a way to make it work on AMD cards.
They poured a ton of money and time in this thing to make it to actually work. I don't expect to see AMD doing anything like this anytime soon, but it'd be awesome if they do.
Just tried installing updates on my friends Mac book pro with a HD... Took forever not to mention the time it took to get the applications open.. Ssd is great
Damn Nvidia sure know how to deliver.
Just to let you know Linus, this video is excellent. You've really come on since your earlier uploads, your commentary is excellent and there's just the right amount of info. Thanks for the videos.
linus, you are great at multi-tasking. That was a lot of info that you went through during the unboxing/ construction
Not positive, but I think that he probably uses the audio of one recording and the visuals of the other. Thus the lack of audio changing when it goes from construction back to linus.
People didn't care much about SSD because it doesn't actually affect gameplay, only load times.
Also, SSD made a huge compromise in capacity, this g-sync doesn't seem to have any compromises.
It effects gameplay. The data transfer is alot faster then harddisk , which should cause output to have much lesser delay. In exact same way to transfer rates. But even harddisk does this so fast, the delay should be unnoticable on both situations.
implying people don't care about convenience
Crispy Zeal The thing is so many applications don't have onerous load-times, they test a rig because of graphical fidelity, resolution and frame-rate demands.
SSD is obviously better, but at such a cost in price and capacity, I think many would rather take the inconvenience of slightly longer load times.
Well both G-Sync and SSD don't really have anything worse than current normal monitors and HDD they are just both more expensive, I don't really see what you mean that price is a compromise on SSD but not on G-Sync.
I could not go back to not having operating system at least on an ssd. I don't put games on my ssd due to limited capacity compared to size of games worth it but I out os and software such as video editing and photo editing software that normally take ages to load and such.
I had to create and use a partition on my Seagate Barracuda 2TB SATA III drive around the beginning of the year for an AOMEI Partition Assistant tutorial I had to produce - migrating from a HDD to SSD.
I wanted to cry, and I was glad to get the tutorial over with so I could go back to using my OCZ Vertex 4 128GB. I hate having to work on other people's computers that don't have SSDs.
Morpheus: "I can't show you G-sync... you have to experience it for yourself"
awesome, great video always Linus :)
btw... i LOVE your youtube channel im so GLAD that i found it a few days ago.
you guys put out amazing content, keep it up
7:57 Slick's name is Luke. Cool.
Didn't know that till now?
we already knew their names since CES... were you raised under a rock?
Mark Espiritu Give the guy a break.
Mark Espiritu Isn't that a little harsh for not knowing a useless piece of information from nearly a year ago?
Of course not. >:D
I currently bought an SSD.
When I didn't have it. I was like "It's too expensive, it doesn't hurt to wait an extra 2 minutes every loading time".
Now I have my SSD. And it litteraly became a habit. I cannot use normal HDD computers too slow for me. Especially as a computer scientist, an SSD is now for me a MUST HAVE.
I never even have think twice about rebooting because it's so fast. I exactly know what you mean.
The difference I experienced when adding an SSD into my computer was and still is astounding. I literally notice when even a small file is being accessed from my hard drives and not my SSD. It's THAT big of a difference. If you haven't bought an SSD then treat yourself cause they're amazing and its Christmas :DDDD
But I'm broke ):
*****
Get a job.
Don't even get me started on that. :P
*****
Then you have no complaining rights.
So I upgraded my Dell Inspiron 17r Special Edition to an SSD and put the 1TB HDD in the other drive. The difference in boot time is HUGE and loading times for some of my bigger games are tiny. I really notice when I play League of Legends on my laptop, because I usually have to wait quite a long time for everyone else
Let's say I have 2 non g-sync monitors and I connect a g-sync compatible monitor, will I not be able to use the other 2 monitors because I have g-sync enabled on my g-sync monitor? Or will I be able to use g-sync on 1 monitor while the other 2 are not running g-sync?
Really exited for this to get into the main stream, I went SSD a few months back and I couldn't imagine not having it anymore.
It'll be great when this technology becomes more readily available.
I remember watching this video 6 years ago, today I finally got my hands on it
My honest opinion and thoughts:
I would really want to see G-Sync available on all monitors as a standalone. The fact that it has to be built for certain monitors only, means that we're seriously limited in what we can buy with the technology within it.
For example:
I game on my LG IPS234V - it has 5ms response time, which is fine by me and has absolutely beautiful picture viewing colours.
I wouldn't sacrifice the IPS panel in it for a TN one. I won't ever consider TN ever again - so with that in mind, why would I consider G-Sync if it is only built on certain monitors (looks like TN only).
That's my main thoughts about it. I understand the principle and really admire the step forward in gaming. It is a great invention and use of several technologies in one. For very serious gamers I think G-Sync should be a must buy.
Here's a thought; if I can get a G-sync monitor with a 780 for the same price as a 120+Hz monitor with an r9 290 and Mantle, I'd consider getting it.
Linus, congrats on your work, this channel is just awesome...i learn so much, and the fact of you guys give true opinions makes it even better! Keep up the awesome work (Linus + rest of the team =) )
IPS with G-Sync and my dreams will come true.
they did didnt they?
asus 165hz gsync ips panel is already here
This kind of informative vid is what I love to see Linus. I haven't gotten an SSD yet but just going from Windows XP to 8 was a speed boost that amazed me. Given that an SSD will make even more of a difference, one or 2 will definetly be going into a build since the prices have come down.
Can G-SYNC be adapted to existing displays or do you have to purchase a special display that supports it? Because that will be a deal breaker for me since I don't use PC monitors as my displays. Also I would take 120 - 144hz over this if I had to buy a new screen since in the long run I think it would feel smoother.
It works with 120-144hz displays, it's really what it was made for. A 120-144hz monitor by itself is inferior to one with a g-sync module.
Only that one ASUS monitor can be "Upgraded" to support G-sync. Otherwise you'll have to buy a new monitor with G-sync supported. Personally, I'll wait until there's a good 1440p, 120hz G-sync monitor :P
4:58 he mentions that u will probably not be able to mod it
you dont use PC monitors as displays? so you like more 1080p 46" crap TVs? one day your eyes will bleed ... I yet have to see a big TV which will not make me motion sick and my eyes hurt.
it could be compatible but the cost of R&D to build kit for every monitor out there would be stupid high. and take a lot of time.
I used to play games with old crappy HDD. Since my change to SSD, I've been sleeping better, my wife is happy, and my kids loved it! Thanks SSD!
This is truly revolutionary... I think this is going to give the edge back to NVIDIA again.
Dude, I don't think NVIDIA ever lost the edge.
ZomWomProductions Well since AMD offers products with similar performance but much cheaper, yes, they have lost their edge when it comes to gamers on a budget.
ZomWomProductions
They kinda lost after all three new consoles use AMD. But I still love my 670!
Bornstellar25 Consoles don't deserve Nvidia products.
invidia has always been number 1.'
amd and all the others can suck a dick.
Thanks very much for this vid, really good stuff!
I'll be looking out for your future review and info on G-sync.
Definitely exited about G-Sync :D
Just purchased a $570 2560x1440 monitor ... when that wears out then sure I'll look for a G-Sync monitor and hopefully there will also be 120/144 Hz 'IPS/PLS' panels with > HD (1920x1080) by then.
G-Sync on TVs? Hell yeah! Exactly what I was hoping for. I just hope the next revision of HDMI, possibly HDMI 2.5 or 3.0 will fully support this technology and I hope set top-boxes, consoles and appliances like these will soon get G-Sync support in their internal graphics cards. Wouldn't be bad on smartphones and tablets either, although we don't experience stuttering, lag and tearing on these particular devices that much. I'm assuming this could be used also in any desktop and laptop, even if not for gaming, to eliminate any frame-drop related issue and such.
If only we could combine G-sync with Mantle....the PC master race would take over the world.
True..
I like hearing Slick's opinion! You should do that more often!
I have that monitor. I wish I could just buy the G sync module and install it into the monitor :(
This is just groundbreaking tech guys ... i watched Linus' livestream when it was first anounced and i really can't wait to witness it come to the customer hands ...
If Nvidia reads this... Please give it to AMD... We all know that PhysX is epic but it failed because only Nvidia supports it perfectly...
Use Mantle and give AMD G-Sync. Thank you.
-NvidiaFanBoy
not gonna happen. Why would they give their competitor something that will give them an edge.
JungleG1337 But it's not an edge because both can use it. That's not an edge. That's a level playing field and not fragmenting the market
yeah, I dunno why Linux is like "wow, just think in a few years from now we won't be able to live without G-sync" because sure, I was pretty interested in it, but I lost most of my interest when I found out I needed both, a (decent) Nvidia card and monitor, I'm sure most of us like the monitor/TV we have now, so I personally don't see a reason to get a new one even if I did already have a good Nvidia card.
They won't, why would they give their new technology to their competitors?
3:12 Now on to... This guy... *Linus shows of his biceps* Well played, Linus... Well played...
I have followed G-Sync as well as Mantle and all the other bits and bobs of the tech pipe, and with all that taken into account I will not be worrying about this tech at all, it will just be a matter of years before even this is phased out and monitors are able to do this no matter the brand of GPU. Lets face it and be honest that is what we want, buying into G-Sync locks you into a specific vendor I don't believe Nvidia will allow ATI to milk any of this they are already looking at a struggle IF Mantle ends up being as good as we all want it to be.
That is not to say G-Sync is not exciting tech or news, but for me it is exciting for from the technical standpoint of what is soon to come not particularly because of what will be available soon. Just remember what Linus said " Nvidia may have a hard time selling this" we are certainly used to what we deal with now ATI will have a response to this maybe not next year but it will come if not an entire hardware standard soon after. Linus knows this as well as other people who are able to see more than 10 feet in front of them.
Oh and before I forget Linus, yes I do own an SSD "Corsair Force GT" absolutely no-way I will use a HDD for the main OS unless its under critical circumstances, its damn painful enough using other peoples HDD's when fixing their issues because 8/10 the computer is a decade older than the tech I am used too before we even take HDD speed into consideration.
As always good show!
i agree and it will probably go the same way as 10-bit output on video cards to be honest about it as yeah it exsists but unless anything affordable runs with it it will not be popular and 10-bit monitor inputs are not affordable nor do i see G-Sync monitors being either. In this i would want to see a 10-bit monitor with G-Sync so it displays all the frames at the highest defition of color space with minimal to no frame deleteing, frame tearing, etc.
yumri4
Well that's right, you look back a year ago "Wide Gamut" IPS displays were a hot topic but they cost in a lot of cases 2x as much as a standard IPS which already costed between $800-$1000 and they had some drawbacks such as applications were not guaranteed to support them 100% which resulted in odd colour reproduction in same cases.
It is only in 2013 that the better of the IPS displays are becoming affordable and 1920 resolutions cost as little as $160 for an LCD-LED backlit display. Most notable is ASUS's slim bezel displays in the 27" size bracket come using AH-IPS for around $450 (www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=558_1368&products_id=22547), IPS took time to flourish and by the time it made it's way into mainstream users it already been surpassed with better panels.
Their is a far better chance that streaming locally and VR will go mainstream before G-Sync ever will. VR with the RIFT is coming in at an excellent sub $300 price point which is pretty much spot on for mainstream consumer buyers.
"it will just be a matter of years before even this is phased out and monitors are able to do this no matter the brand of GPU". THIS. +1000.
I agree on the solid state drive thing. Any computer that isn't using an SSD annoys the hell out of me. I'll be buying one of these as soon as possible.
Anyone who claims they have never noticed screen tearing with Vsync disabled needs to go to an opticians and get their eyes tested. Yes, screen tearing occurs less often on 120 hz and 144 hz monitors but it definitely still happens. Also, to these people that claim they don't get screen tearing, I recommend you get stuck into BF4 multiplayer. Considering your eyes have tuning issues you would be right at home in BF4 multiplayer because what you shoot at in that game is not exactly where your bullets are going!
Just picked up a newer generation Asus VG247QE - Can't WAIT to try out G-sync -- the displayport cable is in the mail lol
nVidia needs to license this technology to Intel, so it'll be compatible with Optimus. It would be nice if they'd open it up to AMD too but if I know nVidia at all, I don't think they will. Which is a pity, because a strong AMD means Intel and nVidia can't rest on their laurels. Nice explanation of G-Sync, btw, Linus. I find it odd how not that many people can imagine the benefits of this technology. If ever I build a desktop pc (probably in the not too distant future) I'd definitely go for G-Sync.
This is why I come to LinusTech. Thanks a bunch!
Gsync sounds more interesting than 4K for me. Will follow closely of course.
I don't think it will become the same as the case of SSDs because it only works for NVIDA cards. If they want it to sell it should work for all/ as many graphics cards as possible.
That's the thing though. NVIDIA does want it to sell. NVIDIA is a corporation. At the end of the day, profit is what matters. It makes little sense from a financial standpoint to offer revolutionary technology to your competition. This will add to the list of reasons for purchasing NVIDIA products instead of AMD products. Little things like this could lead to people who switch to NVIDIA never going back to AMD. Good for business (on NVIDIA's end) but bad for the consumer for a number of reasons.
Thomas Berselli yay economics. its also good for consumers in other ways - patents encourage innovation that is to be delivered to consumers. no cake and eat it too. still sucks in those other ways tho. damn give and take
I have watched and tested The G-sync technology at Dreamhack Winter 2013 in Jönköping Sweden. It was sooo awsome
Once you go SSD, there's no turning back.
I used an SSD for my Windows 7 boot drive for about a year before I wanted to do a reinstall of W7. I'd gotten a bit tired of managing the three partitions that I'd ended up with, so I just decided to save the SSD for an Xubuntu install. I can't wait to get another SSD to replace my hard drive. Even though it's 7200RPM, everything feels unresponsive compared to the SSDs performance. Awesome explanation of G-sync, guys! :D
I dont know if the SSD example is a good one for comparison.
I feel SSD vs HDD offer so MUCH more, where g-sync sure is great, but dont offer the big jump that SSD vs HDD was.
I made the switch to SSD when 240gb drives went below $300 and it was the best upgrade I've made to my PC besides my video card. Apps open almost instantaneous. Restarts around 10 seconds or less. Going back to a HDD would be so painful. There's no way. As I already have a Kepler card, I'm extremely excited about G-Sync. In ACIV right now I basically have two options. Vsync off and horrific tearing, or Vsync on and terrible stutter. I've heard claims that 40fps with Gsync looks smoother than 55fps on a 60hz monitor, and it makes sense. I can't wait.
All these new Monitor upgrades, I mean; 4k Resolution, 144hz, 3d capability, and now g-sync. I mean Yeah great, awesome super cool. However they are not in the average consumers budget.
Moving onto the question which was asked in this video, with regards to SSDs. While I have an SSD [Samsung 840PRO 128GB] I find it is fast but I don't find it necessary or can't live without. I only upgraded because I was running a 4 year old 5400RPM Seagate Sata III, which had a read and write of approximately 60-70mb/s.
I believe I'll upgrade my monitors [S273HL and G245H], when G-sync/High fresh/Ultra Definition monitors become standard, and they have flushed out the current standard 1920x1080 60Hz.
Well most things aren't in the average consumer budgets when they first come out, and if anything the price of new tech decreases faster now then at any time that I can remember, so I don't see that as an issue.
John Patz While they are decreasing in price, it will take a few years before a monitor with a few or all of these features will be the price of a standard 1920x1080 24" 60Hz 2013.
Base on the information, G-SYNC equals to a monitor with no tearing at high fps, no stuttering in low fps and no input lag. Even with only the game runs only 30fps, the animation should theoretically still be buttery smooth.
Holy shit, Luke get some sleep! :D
If a G-Sync "upgrade kit" were to come out for an Asus PB278Q, I would literally cry tears of joy!
Wtb 1600p g-sync monitor @ ~27"
Going from SSD to HDD does make a difference.
I was used to loging in to my PC which took 7sec rather than the 25sec w/ HHD.
Applications were brought up faster, as well as it was totally silent.
Once you go SSD, its really hard to go back, esp when its running your OS on there.
Really excited to hear more about the G-Sync, esp the Cost range.
A quick question.. How will this work on consoles? Cause I have my PC and my Wii U plugged into the same monitor, will G-Sync have any effect on my Wii U? Or will I even be able to plug in my wii u?
It's going to have to go down to nvidia's decision.
Wouldn't it not work because of the gfx card requirement?
I've got a SSD for about a year now i think and it is really so good! my neighbour will get one for christmas now but all this time when we meet we could actually drink a coffee while booting. I also don't really need to care about autostart applications because it's just fast all the time. And on top of this I just got win8.1 while he still uses 7. After the bios screen I'm up in 9 secs, insane guys!
Firstly i can't live with a system that doesn't have an SSD as the boot drive anymore. And secondly, if i can buy a G-Sync monitor with 2.5k res, it's not a bloody TN panel and it is at least 27", i don't care what it costs i am buying it no matter what. Because that's how much i hate tearing and having to use V-Sync in every other game to try and reduce it with the cost of lag and it still sometimes feels laggy even if i see fraps reporting steady 60 FPS.
Man I'm soooo excited about this, I hate lag, stutter and the frickin' tearing!
AMD being given license by Nvidia to make Gsync available in their graphic cards?
yeah i dont think that's going to happen giving their competitors one of their technologies
it's like microsoft giving Sony license to make Halo games available in PS4 or PS3 platforms
It would only serve to make Nvidia more money. Because, if Nvidia licensed G-Sync to AMD, then every G-Sync card AMD sells would have to pay a royalty to Nvidia.
More like Sony giving Microsoft license to use Blu-ray in their XboxOne
AMD already announced Free-Sync... You already know what that will be...
xlrxlr Yes, it would be more likely, but the Xbox one uses BluRay my friend :)
Otto Knabe Yea, that was my point as in the fact that Sony lets it's main competitor use their technology would be a better analogy than Sony getting halo
buyed a 840 evo for my top rig, switched to the laptop because the improvement on the main was just not worth, barely noticeable. But on the laptop the improvement was simply outstanding, now responding as fast as the main rig
I have an SSD in my pc and when I have to do work on school computers I want to punch a wall. There decent PCs but it feels like an hour just to load programs and boot the pc
I have just bought a Asus VG248QE And can't wait to get my hands on the do it yourself G-sync kit to come out :-)
If only AMD and Nvidia could hold hands and sing we are the world. We could have Mantle across the board, G-Sync would work with every GPU, TrueAudio would be a free download for everyone and maybe Physx Support for every card too.
Mantle is open-source. However, if that happened, that would be nothing short of catastrophic. There would be no reason other than fanboyism to buy a R9 290 over a 780. There would be no competition. Maybe cooling solutions would be better for one, but other than that, there would be no incentives for you to buy from one company than the other, and therefore there would be no competition in prices, and so prices for Graphics Cards would shoot through the roof.
Without competition companys get lazy
But if that would happen they wouldent compete with each other and GPU´s would evolve slower but it would be nice to have Physx on my Amd card ;)
That would be amazing, but lets be honest, that will never happen lol
Not to mention a monopoly on the graphics card market thus meaning they can price everything the amounts they want to.
I am looking forward to this technology when its ready!!
G-sync is great in theory...BUT, i will not buy another monitor just for that, i will not pay extra for a feature that will only work on an nvidia GPU, i can however get a 120hz monitor with a 290x/780 and run the games at 120FPS with adaptive vsync. Doesn't that sound better from a buyer's perspective?
Your brain won't say the same when it sees a really nice mixture of ugly tearing and terrible stuttering. You might think you don't see it but it's there and it's ridiculous.
"In theory"? You don't get it so it's a theory? Nice.
The biggest problem of G-Sync is not the cost, it's the fact that PEOPLE JUST DON'T GET IT.
Ladybug Crystal im running on a 60hz monitor and always get above 60FPS with my trifire R9 290x setup and there are no signs of tearing at all.
kdawgmaster You don't expect it to be free, do you? It's a new technology and everybody went crazy about the price.
Sure, with that amount of money you can just turn V-Sync on and don't worry about anything, no tearing, no stuttering, a bit lag. If you turn off V-Sync and don't see any tearing, go check your eyes asap, seriously.
G-Sync makes the most sense when you can't push out consistently more than 60FPS at the settings that you like.
And if you're planing to get a 120/144Hz monitor or later on when you grab a-freaking-demanding-next-title game, that's a different story.
Once prices drop a bit a G-Sync monitor makes far more sense. Since gaming at 50FPS with G-Sync is very smooth with minimal lag you don't need nearly the same Graphics and CPU power to run at 120FPS+ to maintain a mostly 120FPS synched experience.
Let's say a card costs $300 that runs the latest games at 50FPS average, and it's $800 to run the same games at mostly 120FPS. That's $500 difference!
So if building a new system it CAN make a lot of sense to spend slightly more on a G-Sync monitor and less on the CPU/Graphics, or just graphics.
(This technology would also improve the console experience a lot. Since Sony makes HDTV's and the PS4 it would be awesome to see them license this from NVidia as it's only a driver issue on the GPU side. You'd have to try it side-by-side but it would be a noticeably better experience.)
I loved how he put it together as he was talking! Man crush.
Got an ssd in my gaming rig and had a HDD in my work laptop, couldn't use that laptop anymore :) it just felt so slow. #firstworldproblems
I can't wait to see this in action.
Why does this sound like a marketing talk promoted by NVIDIA? Still love it though ^_^
Except that Linus has reported that he is not paid by any of these companies. I trust this guy more than your hunch.
Really? 7:00 "Let's take a look at why I believe this will be extremely hard for nVidia to sell" ... not exactly "the way it's meant to be played", is it?
Baka C. You definitely missed my point.
omg!!! LINUS got this before christmas!
6 months on, are there any good 1080p good and affordable G-SYNC monitors now?
I'm waiting on the BenQ XL2420G
Guy Rodger when is it coming out ? cant find it anywhere :P
Happy Grass There have only been articles which all seem to match the vague 'Fall 2014' announced by BenQ. I'm sure it will be worth the wait and costs though. :)
Guy Rodger Probably going to be just as expensive as all the othert Gsync monitors :(
Mart Siemerink Save up or stop complaining about stuttering and frame tearing then?
Getting a new monitor around April and currently use a gtx670 so I will be keeping a eye on G-Sync for sure
So, what about a trade? AMD helps Nvidia with Mantle, and Nvidia helps AMD with G-Sync. Why not? Nope, screw the gamer.
The few times I've had to turn V-sync on I haven't really noticed any lag
For this to kick off it needs to available on AMD cards too.
Thing is NVidia have spent years developing this solution, they aren't going to just give it up so easy. Maybe when they have recovered most of the development cost they might licence it to AMD. However if AMD were smart (which I believe they are), they will be working on their own version. NVidia have given them enough information to work out a solution of their own after all.
My main system uses a 840 pro, which as of yesterday I now have running with RAPID and my work station uses a WD Black. I can say without a doubt that having a SSD as the C Drive makes a huge difference, waiting that extra ~ 8 - 10 seconds on bootup is torturous when you just want to get things done in an early morning.
great my $300 144hz asus monitor is already out of date
The ASUS VG248QE, the monitor you have, is actually the exact monitor that G-SYNC is available for. If you go to www.geforce.com/hardware/technology/g-sync/where-to-buy
and click on Digital Storm or Overlord Computer you can get them to install the G-SYNC module for you.
Great Video Linus! If I had to pick a video that best explains this topic, I would say you nailed it 100%. I am very excited for this technology. It will be another great step forward for gaming.
new PhysX is here...so let's just forget about it and move on. (nVidia user here) When this technology is available in most display devices then we can talk about how great it is compared to old v-sync. The cat is out of the bag and I don't think nVidia can hold exclusivity on how input signal is synced on display.
I'm definitely going to buy a G-Sync monitor but I'm not going to rush out. I'll just get one when I need a new monitor, rather than getting one 'just because'. It'll sell, but it'll be steady.
I've never had tearing before actually I didn't know what it was before this video
wow, the last part was like watching tv-shop. good job, guys.
so does this mean if i were to have a 144hz monitor, that will be the max, but then if i'm running a game at 120FPS it is pretty much 120Hz, if my frames then drop to 100fps it will be at 100hz?
Yes.
Pretty much, yes
Yes.
sweet :D
***** Are you serious? That's what G-Sync is about. It automatically changes monitor refresh rate to match your GPU. If you have 120Hz monitor and the game only runs at 45fps the G-Sync equipped monitor will refresh the image 45 times per second (45Hz).
I did go SSD a while ago.
I will never go back.
I will treat G-sync in the same way as soon as I get a compatible monitor
AMD should develop their own refresh rate matching technology. They are already incorporating audio technology in their graphics cards, eliminating the need for sound cards, so it's only a matter of time.
OR amd and nvidia share their tech with each other and we have a perfect world :D
....yeah i like dreaming
I wouldn't say it eliminates the need for sound cards, because you have never needed a sound card because of on-board audio. But my question is, is the sound performance of these cards on par with a dedicated sound card?
Zachary Turner It would be better than on-board audio, but probably not up to Xonar Pheobus quality. A nice compromise nonetheless.
Zachary Turner
people seem to misunderstand the function of the amd udio feature, it's not really about sound quality but more about the calculation of sound positioning in game engines wich is something that atm is handled by the cpu
Good analogy with SSDs. I find workstations frustrating, I am just not used to having to wait after booting up the PC. Even opening word is overly noticeable. If g-sync is the same scale of upgrade, I look forward to it... haha
Oh come on! I just got a new monitor recently.
I hate not using my SSDs. G-SYNC is definitely in my future. Hope it gets incorporated into the coming VR headsets...
So AMD allows intel to use 64 bit to help the community... and Nvidia won't help ATI/AMD with g-sync... nice. i hope it ends up fucking up.
I've had SSD for about a year now and i needed to send it to RMA at one point. I installed my OS to my 1TB HDD and I felt the impact from second one. The installation took longer, the boot took longer, installing the updates took 2x longer. All the games I play took 2-3x longer to load (ex. BF4 loading screens took about 30s-1min) . From that moment I've always said that SSD is the next upgrade to your computer that you want to get. Never back to HDD!
Pc gamers. The master race. The race that consists of gamers that use stereo audio and think they are getting 100 genuine frames per second on a 60 hz monitor. In my opinion, screen tearing makes pc games look worse then last gen console games. The master race that spends thousands on hardware to experience screen tearing and virtual surround sound. I worry about pc gamers sometimes. I'm an avid pc gamer myself by the way.
Some people need to wake up and smell the coffee. This same group of pc gamers are probably defending BF4, stating hats its perfectly smooth. Honesty is a beautiful thing. I just wish more people would be honest with themselves. The stupidity and shallow narrow mindset of some of the comments in here baffles me. Stop being so stubborn and acknowledge the fact that G-Sync is a real massive innovation in how we will experience video games.
Perfectly smooth animations at all times with no input lag regardless of frame rate. Morpheous would say this to the fanboys and people that so helplessly protect the hardware that they currently own, "FREE YOUR MIND". Gamers and pc gamers the world over should be celebrating and applauding the fact that this technology has finally arrived. Finally the title of "The Master Race" is warranted with technology such as Gsync.
Who ever argues my point is either an AMD GPU owner, Nvidia GPU owner that recently invested in non Gsync monitors, or some weird individual that doesn't mind horrible horrid nasty screen tearing. I rest my perfectly put case:D. Honesty hurts, but honesty is beautiful too.
Yay
1) Consoles and PC's can both get tearing. The only difference is you can decide if it's on or off on PC. On console that decision was made by the game developer.
I watched a video of Diablo 3 and they showed the screen tearing every time it dropped below the 60FPS VSYNC rate (so they use Adaptive VSync like NVidia's feature).
2) 100FPS on a 60Hz monitor does have benefits. It reduces mouse lag even further than 60FPS at 60Hz. But then you get screen tearing.
3) I'm playing games at 2560x1440 with ULTRA settings at 60FPS that look far, far better than on an HDTV and I'm close so it's more immersive as well.
Long story short is that there are absolutely NO visual advantages on a console. They are far inferior to a high-end gaming PC.
4) G-SYNC on PC just makes things better yet again. No screen tearing, no lag due to VSYNC, and monitors that can game at 120FPS for far quicker, smoother experiences.
Now I think consoles are fine, but I don't get why people post such misinformed information.
Thanks for commenting. You know your stuff. Cheers. Irishlad147
Holy fuck, PC elitists are annoying and increasing in numbers these days.
This is an old comment but I'm going to point this out here: The reason you don't (typically) see tearing on a console is because the developer has chosen to implement vsync, or some other way to limit the framerate to 60/30. They aren't any different in software terms than a PC, all that matters is the developer's implementation of measures against screen tearing.
Furthermore, any associated input lag is typically harder to notice on a controller. You'll notice input lag a lot more with a mouse than a joystick, as the latter typically has slower and smoother movement.
Console games force you into one set of settings, and that's it. If you like the way that the game looks and responds, that's great! ...What if you don't? What if you'd rather turn down the visual fidelity to get 60fps and/or a render resolution of 1080p? What if you'd like to turn vsync or other framerate limiters off to run a competitive game at much higher framerates for reduced input lag, even with screen tearing? What if you don't like effects like motion blur or depth of field? What if you want more anti-aliasing? Tough, you're stuck with whatever configuration the developer thinks will generate the best review scores and that's it.
I get choice as a PC gamer. I can choose how my game looks. I can choose to run a game with vsync enabled if the engine handles it well and I don't mind the added input lag. Or I can choose to run without it for lower input lag. Or I can try to implement some other framerate limiter, as I do on Skyrim, if the engine doesn't handle vsync well. Or I can spend the hundreds on a high refresh rate and/or gsync monitor to get the best of all worlds.
And for the record, not all PC gamers are elitists that will go around proclaiming that we are the "Master Race" and that consoles are terrible. Very few do. Don't stereotype all PC gamers, or even groups of PC gamers with a particular piece of hardware, just because some of them are loud dicks. That would be like me saying that every console gamer is a screaming 10 year old that fucked my mother.
Proud to finally own a Gsync monitor (same monitor in this video) I dont have lots of money, but I was in the market for a new monitor and just happened to have the required hardware to run gsync, so it seemed like the right choice for me.
He's right. SSD is like losing your virginity. You really don't want to go back to your hand after you've had the real thing.
I can't fricken wait! I would wait in line for this
Im sure AMD will come out with a alternative, even better if something similar becomes a standard
if amd dosnt then u can expect monitor manufactures to do it them selves. I bet when samsung see's it they will make something then sell it with their current high end panels.
My thoughts on Gsync right now is that its not worth the extra 100+ bucks. On every game I play with my set up im always above 60FPS at 1440P and dont get ANY screen tearing at all.
Absolutely, I recently moved to 1440p PLS panel and I would like to see something like g sync on 4k or 1440p IPS monitor
amd is always behind of nvidia cuz their tech is far superior than amd it will take some time for amd to figure out sometihng like that
I recently built a PC for myself and put in the Samsung 840 Pro. Coming from a 5400 rpm hdd, it obviously was a big difference. Since I didn't buy the smallest version, I have Windows 8 on it and some games.
Skyrim is a really good example. I was talking with my friends about the game when we got to the unfortunate "Fast Travel" spots you encounter sometimes.
My friends complained about waiting for the Fast Travel loading screen to end, you teleported you inside a house or just outside the gates of a city. They were saying that it took maybe 20 seconds before they could continue playing.
I realised how amazingly fast an SSD is and the fact that I would never go back to a HDD.
i can't live without a SSD anymore.. i doesn't need to be big, it just needs to run the OS and programs
yeah.. that's also exactly the problem with G-Sync, I'm glad Linus made me aware of that. once you have something that is significantly better, you often can't really do without anymore, or at least it annoys you. this is a big reason why I don't have a SSD.
I was actually getting a little hyped at G-Sync, but when Linus talked about this I knew he was right!
Although today`s monitors don´t support dynamic refresh rates as Gsync does, many of them are able to sync to other rates than just 60 Hz if you force them. So here´s a neat trick for those who are always below 60: Force a refresh rate that matches (or is twice of) the highest stable framerate your rig can run, and hope your screen accepts it. Then enable Vsync.
Most games I play will always stay above 40 FPS with fairly high settings, but almost never reach 60FPS. A solid 40 FPS is good enough for me and my slow-paced games, but it doesn´t flow smoothly on a monitor that´s locked to 60Hz.
So I used a tweak (search for Custom Resolution Utility) to have the video card output 40Hz and I enabled Vsync. Solid 40 FPS @ 40Hz, no stutter, no tearing. Input lag is usually not an issue when GPU and monitor are in time. Some screens won´t accept 40Hz, but I think most will go down to 50Hz.
Tip: DP and VGA seem to be less picky about which refreshrates they accept.
Great!
Now we just need that AMD let Nvidia use Mantle and Nvidia let AMD use G-Sync and we will be happy
AMD ARE letting nvidia use mantle. It is open technology. Nvidia however is notoriously anti open technology, I find it incredibly hard to believe they will allow AMD to use this.
AMD should license Mantle to Nvidia and Nvidia should license G-Sync to AMD...
Well for someone like me who has only recently built a new pc that I don't plan on upgrading for awhile and the only component left to upgrade is my 23" Samsung led non gaming monitor. Gsync compared to things like ssds is going to make me wait for awhile until an affordable option is available. Cuz I picked up my 240gb Samsung Evo up for like $130 around thanksgiving this year. And so the waiting begins.
So basically if I want no screen tearing in a game I have to get nvidia hardware....
For now. Just because nVidia is pioneering the technology doesn't mean that it won't become adopted by other companies and widespread. This is something big, it's a forward step for PC gaming...no more tearing, no more stuttering, no more input lag, no downsides! Do you REALLY think nVidia will be able to keep it exclusive to their cards? Obviously getting around patents could be an issue, but if it's something that works, then be rest assured that someone will find a way to make it work on AMD cards.
yes. that is correct. Nvidia is the superior company. no need to be butthurt.
They poured a ton of money and time in this thing to make it to actually work. I don't expect to see AMD doing anything like this anytime soon, but it'd be awesome if they do.
Just tried installing updates on my friends Mac book pro with a HD... Took forever not to mention the time it took to get the applications open.. Ssd is great
I won't go back to HDD ever again. Even if my family's life depends on it