So I fell for the FreeSync meme, will it actually be smoother at around framerates between 60-144?
Or even still smooth if I go crazy on it and run it with a game running at 50FPS?
>>54766248
Freesync is SW solutiom compared to Nvidia HW solution. As much as I am going to get shat on, HW solution generaly works better.
Now to the point. It removes screen tearing which occurs during v-sync off and also removes screen stutter which occurs during v-sync on. So think about it as an improved v-sync. 30fps still looks like 30fps and is inferior to 60fps but minus tearing and stutter.
Its a luxury, a little overpriced but it works.
>>54766350
>imply that hardware is not just a denial chip for non nvidia gpu
>>54766350
Freesync is not SW, it's just a open standard and works with 3rd party chips, they still use hardware scaler modules.
Where did you hear that BS. That's why Freesync is more common, because with Nvidia you have to use their scaler modules what only they produce.
>>54766373
Support your argument by relevant article and I take my opiniom back. Otherwise I consider your post just another trolling attempt
>>54766248
Doom is the first game I've played with FreeSync and it feels butter smooth all the time. Pretty cool considering I've got the settings set to as high as they possibly go and I know I'm not getting a stable 144 frames per second but it feels smooth anyway. So, works for me.
>>54766416
>>54766350
You're wrong.
Any sync needs just the panel to be compatible. Freesync and g-sync are the protocols of the link between the gpu and the panel driver. G-sync implemented a chip to inject extra frames, freesync does the same with the graphics driver. Freesync can also be deployed on many monitors with just a firmware update, as you can see on some of the Korean monitors. Freesync depends on the monitor to function, while g-sync monitors are all about the same as it's a closed protocol controlled strictly by ngreedia. Freesync is smoother, less latent, and faster than g-sync if you choose a comparable monitor with comparable hardware. Gsync used to be better in the beginning of the tech, but freesync has matured a lot and will continue to improve. Also, Intel adopted Freesync for their future chips.
>>54766350
^Perfect example of why you don't take advice from /g/ You should always do your own research.
>>54766248
I don't know if its a meme but I have screen tear. My next monitor will have to be freeSync.
>>54766248
I don't know about FreeSync but if you got that monitor you won't be unhappy. I have two MG279Q and I don't even use FreeSync and they're fantastic. FreeSync adds input lag. Pick your poison.
Freesync/G-sync is only good when your framerate is below the screen refresh rate.
G-sync implementation is better it makes games that run at 30FPs or so feel smoother and not just because vsync off but their whole implementation is a lot better, amd starting copying nvidia in this deparment recently but their implementation is still inferior and lacking beside that their method is retriscted to only few selected monitors since there is a refresh rate range where it can only work on optimal conditions, while g-sync works on every monitor with g-sync.
You get what you pay for.
>>54767926
You are almost right, but it's not just software, they have to support DisplayPort 1.2, it's a advancement on a power saving technology build in the DisplayPort 1.2 protocol, it requires a special chipset, that's why FreeSync support can be added to those monitors with a simple firmware upgrade.
Nvidia basically sells those same chips with already supporting G-Sync firmware.
>>54766350
They're both hardware, the Nvidia one is just proprietary. That's why Gsync monitors cost so much more.
>>54768089
The point of FreeSync is to reduce input (yes, screen tearing, but they are related) lag with v-sync turned off...
>>54768136
>playing at 30FPS
Also, it's a fact that even Nvidia knowledges that G-sync costs performance and FreeSync does not. Intel is going for FreeSync, while Nvidia's G-Sync is slowly dying because they fucked up with marketing.
>>54768158
1.2a
>>54768315
Thanks for fixing
>>54768136
Fact: You would not notice the difference between using FreeSync VS G-Sync without knowing wich is wich.
>>54768203
Intel is not going with FreeSync, they are going with AdaptiveSync which will of coruse be better than AMD "FreeSync" just like everything Intel does, AMD don't even support Opengl 4.5, none of their cards do while Intel does so perfectly.
>>54768364
False.
The reason why g-sync is propriety is so they can keep tigh hold of the quality across ALL monitors, while freesync can vary from monitor to monitor, not all freesync monitors support the same refresh raters, so you're going to have different experiences with different freesync monitors, unlike the case with g-sync where quality is across all monitors.
>>54768530
Freesync is adaptive sync.
>>54768203
>>playing at 30FPS
Thats the whole purpose of Adaptivesync/freesync/g-sync anon... smoother gameplay at low framerates, non existent screen tearing and low input latency are just side effects of it, lack of screen tearing because the monitor refresh rate matches the framerate and low input latency because you're not running vsync anymore at higher framerates above the refresh rate of the monitor freesync/g-sync breaks
>>54768571
Freesync is AMD's implementation.
The standard was created by vesa but the implementation is decided by the vendor.
>>54768576
The point was adaptive synchronisation at any framerate, meaning its smooth at framerates from 30-130 not just low.
>>54768614
except amd freesync where you're limited to 40-70 frames in most monitors except expensive ones.
>>54768530
>so you're going to have different experiences with different freesync monitors
Yes, that's why Nvidia does it, but Nvidia is for dumbasses who can't pick a monitor themselves.
That's why Nvidia is getting cucked by their own marketing this time, because casual gaymers don't use adaptive sync and those who do can pick a monitor themselves and would not use a Nvidia GPU anyways.
>>54768638
Yeah, because GSYNC monitors aren't $200 over the "expensive" freesync monitors you fucking moron. LOL
>>54768638
But the expensive ones are usually still cheaper then G-Sync ones, so your point?
Also a 40-70 FreeSync monitor for 20% higher price then a monitor with same specs without FreeSync is worth it in my book.
>>54768670
g-sync is selling like hot pancakes. no one who bught a g-sync monitor has ever complained aobut the quality of it beside where it doens't works on certain games but that's out of nvidia scope and up to the game developer to fix it.
AMD's freesync on the other hand... well the AMD subreddit which is very very anti nvidia and pro amd leaves a very bad taste with freesync.
>>54768696
>>54768683
even so they are still lower quality. Nvidia makes sure g-sync monitors come with extra goodies I'm surprise no one on /g/ knows about this subject, I guess this board is not longer for enthusiast who buy all kind of hardware just because they are enthusiast and instead is infected of people who shill for companies as if it was some kind of console wars but worse.
>>54768733
Have you used both daily?
>>54768733
>extra goodies
>handcuffs, dildos and a camera so you can record your wife while shes cucking you.
>>54766248
dunno about Freesync, I have a Gsync AOC monitor tho, Gsync is great in those games where you cant maintain 60 fps, and for me 45 fps is the absolute minimum where it really feels like 60 fps, under that and you still get that 30fps feeling, even if its slightly better.
>>54768530
>AMD don't even support Opengl 4.5
Good move on AMDs part.
>>54768733
No one cares about G-Shit. Shut up.
>>54769248
>all those 27" @ 1080
>The dearth of 27" 1440p Freesync IPS monitors with Hz more than 40-60Hz headroom VESA mount and good panels is appalling.
Not even AMD fanboys are happy with FreeSync from what I've seen. G-Sync operates in a much larger window of framerates and crucially can go much lower than FreeSync can.
>>54766248
>sync
Just lower your fucking settings, JEEZ. Framerate is always more important than details.
>>54769609
Somehow fags who spend thousands of dollars on expensive gaming PC's balk at the idea of spending extra on a monitor because it's "no big deal" even though it impacts just about everything.
>>54766248
Freesync is a real open standard. The window of minimal and maximum framerate you can have and expect it to work varies depending on the screen. So it comes down to what the screen manufacturer did with it.
>>54766350
The hardware part is a joke. Nvidia impliments gsync in laptops without the hardware. The only excuse they offered for you paying 150 more for their chip is that well we think we want to add stuff later.
>>54766416
First one off google find more if you are interested. Nvidia doesnt make laptop manufactures get the chip.
The excuse that I heard when this first started happening almost a year ago was that they might add other functions later and would need the chip then.
>>54766248
PERFECT MONITOR DUDE
https://www.reddit.com/r/FreeSync/comments/3tusqo/asus_mg279q_modded_to_60144_hz_freesync/
if you haven't already.
if your fps drops below the freesync range, it flashes the image twice so you actually see the same 50fps frame at 100hz and still don't suffer from screentear
>>54770114
hello, i'm an amd fanboy and am very happy about freesync as it makes every game i throw at it appear much smoother because the transitions are faster between the images
