Is G-Sync worth the $700 price tag?
Go to the store and try it out faggot
>>51763897
I work 70hrs per week right now. I don't have time to try it out.
Buy a monitor and try it then. Worst come to worst, you don't like it, send it back, and you eat the $30 or however much restocking fee. It'd be worth it so that you know for the future.
>>51763964
Or I could just ask here and see what people think before I just buy it and find out it might not be worth it.
>>51763915
then whats the point in getting one?
you'll never see it.
>G-Sync
>Supporting proprietary technology when a free as in freedom alternative is available
>>51763996
Because I don't usually work this much. Once December is over I'll work much less.
>>51764009
I'd rather not buy radeon shit and have to replace my PSU as well.
>>51764012
or so you think
>>51763995
It's one of those things that's very divisive. You'd really have to experience it for yourself to make that decision. I personally don't think it's worth the price. Maybe in a year or two, but not now at a $200/$300 premium over a non gsync
>>51764009
>Consciously choosing a worse gaming experience
>>51764039
>>51764025
>hating freedom
>>51764064
Do I have reason to believe you support absolutely no company that infringes upon your freedoms, then?
>>51764064
Has nothing to do with hating freedom and everything to do with price. If I had the watts to support an AMD card I would have gotten one, but I don't and I don't want to replace my PSU when it's perfect for everything but AMD.
>>51764012
So wait till December is over and try it out.
>>51764116
Then all the deals will be over.
Gsync is a meme. There is practically no tearing on 144Hz monitors to begin with. gsync doesn't add any noticeable image quality.
>>51763915
If you don't have time to try it out, you don't have time to use it.
>>51764443
You don't know what second shift is then.
>>51764096
>dun wanna buy new psu
>would still buy gsync
Something smells here op
>>51764421
From what I've read: the main attraction is that it makes lower framerate like 40-55 still feel like 60. Or framerate between 60-72 for 144hz.
>>51764471
>I work 7 days a week from 10am to 10pm every day all year lomng
>>51764421
>implying your gpu can push out 144 fps too
>>51764522
NO SCREEN TEARING
>>51764522
Why dont you spend it on video cards instead anon
980Ti would always run on 60fps, your not even playing competitive shooters
>>51764581
I did buy a 980ti. I want a new monitor so I can get rid of the HDTV ibe been using for the last 5 years. Apparently it's hard to get 60fps at 1440p ultra even with a 980ti, so gsync seems nice.
>>51764581
My gtx 980 doesn't get 60 fps on my 3x2560x1440 triple monitor setup
>>51763870
>MG279Q
>600 euros.
>PG279Q (G-Sync version with buggy 166hz mode)
>950 euros
NOT
WORTH
You could buy another GPU and get 144fps instead of getting tricked by nVidia
>>51763870
>Paying $700 to solve a problem consoles don't have
>>51764687
why are you even on /g/?
and no OP. freesync is better and cheaper and will even fucking work on hdmi next year
>>51764719
Nvidia don't support freesync
>>51763915
>I work 70hrs per week
>>51764736
NVIDIA IS THE TRUMP OF GPU MANUFACTURERS
FREETARDS BACK TO BERNIE
>>51764682
You forget that monitors last much longer than graphics cards.
In my lifetime, I've had:
17" Crt
17" LCD (crt died)
23" LCD
3x27" LCD
Diamond stealth 3d
Matrox Mystique
Voodoo Rush
Voodoo 3
Radeon 7500
Radeon 9700 pro
Radeon 4650
Radeon 6950
Nvidia gtx 980
Anyone who missed out on the Swift on sale for $550 is fucking retarded.
>>51764615
cause its not a Ti
>>51764547
it doesn't need to.
A game running at 60fps on a 60Hz monitor can have tearing every single refresh and each tear is visible for 16.7ms.
A 60fps game on a 144Hz monitor can only have tearing every 2nd or 3rd refresh and each tear is only visible for 6.9ms.
This alone drastically reduces tearing.
>>51764012
Are you one of those part-timers that refill stock in stores between Black Friday and New Year?
>>51764757
my first was 10" monochrome, still have it, still works
>>51764815
These are machines I personally built, still have the altec lansing speakers from the first machine I built myself pentium 233 mmx in like 1997 or something.
My family's first computer was some IBM 8086 or something, it might have had a 10MB harddrive, I used to play kings quest on it.
>>51764757
>Diamond stealth 3d
>>51764793
No I work in a warehouse and it's peak season.
http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/88694-amd-announces-freesync-hdmi/
neat
>>51763870
>Is G-Sync worth the $700 price tag?
Yes.
Try to find a freesync monitor that comes close to the pg279q and evaluate if it's worth that price tag.
You'll find that no monitor comes close and they're all objectively inferior while only costing $100~ less.
>>51764682
If I was gonna buy another 980ti, I would need a new seasonic x PSU, a new mobo cuz mine only has a single pcie2x16 slot, and then a new monitor.
I think that works out to be more than the $700 monitor.
As an owner of a $1000 144hz gsync monitor I can say it's placebo.
>tfw you got the z35 before everybody else on the planet
>>51766369
how do you like this fancy PREDATOR logo?
When I plug my PC into a g sync monitor will it update my control panel? Because I'm about to get one soon and I can't even find the words g sync in the nvidia control panel. Does it auto detect and display the option when you plug in?
>>51766502
its pretty gud bro i like it
it even has color led coming out in the bottom but i turned it off because its awful
>>51763870
G-sync makes no sense.
Variable refresh is a poorfag tool to make shitty GPUs more tolerable in the 30-60 fps.
Yet G-sync monitors command a $150-$200 premium.
Literally every dollar you throw at G-sync would have been put to better use upgrading your GPU instead.
Strobing OTOH is the real deal.
Get enough horsepower to drive your monitor at a solid 120 or 144 fps and you won't regret it.
>>51766643
>have 144hz monitor
>it looks the fucking same
i call placebo
it even overclocks to 200hz
and i have a 980ti so fps isnt not a problem
>>51766653
do you actually have lightboost/ulmb enabled?
nothing on the market can do strobing simultaneously with variable sync, which is the single biggest reason g-sync/freesync are still worthless.
>>51766690
you cant enable ulmb alongside with gsync
i have yet to disable gsync and try ulmb
>>51766690
isn't there a benq which has been modded to do that? I just stick with my crt so I don't know other than when I hear of a new CRT killer gaming monitor
>>51766643
>should have spent the money upgrading your card
See >>51765451
>>51766696
you should seriously consider trying it with a game that your GPU can drive at max refresh rate.
120/144 Hz is nice, but you're literally missing 80-90% of the benefit if you don't have strobing enabled for the actual motion clarity.
In fact, the main point of 120+Hz displays is generally to enable strobing that doesn't make users' eyes bleed from the flicker.
>>51766698
that's news to me, but you'd expect the display makers to figure it out eventually.
the non-linear transition times of LCD subpixels make it a bitch to maintain color correctness when trying anything fancy with overdriving, backlight tweaking, etc.
>>51766900
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escalation_of_commitment
throwing good money after bad? topkek.
if somebody is really physically/thermally/electrically limited, they should just save their cash for a 14/16nm GPU next summer anyway.
variable sync is a mitigation feature, not an actual improvement, so spending $800 to make 45 fps look more tolerable is retarded.
especially now that UHD@120Hz with variable sync is coming out next year.
>>51766911
both of my screens supposedly have anti flicker technology
>>51766369
i dont think ulmb has anything to do with flicker
>>51763870
If you already own the appropriate nVidia GPU, it's definitely worth it. I got pic-related when it was on sale on Newegg and so far it's worth every penny, G-Sync a fucking godsend for emulation, works beautifully for regular-ass games too, it's really hard gaming on anything without adaptive-sync now.
Is it worth $700 to eliminate screen tearing? No, no it's not .. I see screen tearing so rarely and when it's actually bad (which is basically never) I'll throw on v sync and deal with the delay .. (In action games or racing games) first person would be intolerable but I've yet to come across a game that tears badly enough to bother me.
And besides g sync should be something you think about when you naturally upgrade your monitor. Don't just upgraded for the sake of delayless vertical sync.
>>51764025
You'll need to replace your PSU anyway when your NoVidea spontaneously combusts and takes your whole PC with it
>>51764218
$700 for a gsync monitor isn't a deal
>>51763870
If you feel the need to ask that question, then yes...yes it is!
Adaptive sync is good, but it's not worth the g-sync price tag.
i'd still wait it out for the tech to normalize. its still way too expensive atm.
g-sync is nVidia thing
Free-Sync is AMD thing
It seems logical that g-sync monitor wouldn't work with AMD cards, but does free-sync work with nvidia cards ?
>>51768315
Free-sync is not limited to just AMD devices, other devices can use free-sync tech if they wish
>>51768332
Literally no reason for g-sync to exist
>>51768315
Freesync could work with nvidia cards if nvidia wanted them to.
But they won't.
Intel's planning to adopt 'freesync' though in their iGPUs. Or rather, adopt the new displayport standards since that what freesync is, support for the new displayport.
>>51768369
If Intel gives in, nVidia will too, in time
>inb4 In-Sync
>>51768352
same thing with phsyx and gameworks
litterally no other reason but to limit other potential buyers from wanted to go with another product.
Such practices are illegal and I hope the get fined hardcore. I myself went with nvidia because of these factors but I would much rather an AMD card.
>>51764025
Then buy a Fury Nano.
Half way between the 980 and 980Ti for the same power consumption as a 980, all while being cute af
>>51768386
Nah. Nvidia doesn't play like that. They would rather stick to their failed crap just so no-one else can have it.
>>51768392
>litterally no other reason but to limit other potential buyers from wanted to go with another product.
uh they exist as an added bonus for Nvidia users.
If you own an AMD card you have literally no reason unless you are superdumb to be enabling those features as they are meant to be used by Nvidia hardware.
>>51763870
No.
Any 120 or 144hz monitor will reduce tearing sufficiently.
If you run games at such low framerates that G-Sync would actually make a difference, you should spend that money on a new GPU instead.
>>51764719
Nigga, my PS4 drops frames all over the joint.
>>51764009
This its cheaper to by an AMD card and a freesync monitor.
>>51764096
How many watts does your psu put out? Unless it's less than 550 you should be able to run a Fury/Nano/390/290 just fine.
If you're going to get a "sync" monitor then I'd go for freesync. No price premium, just as good, no jews, etc.
>>51771441
>>51771485
Even though AMD finally added low framerate compensation with its new drivers (automatic frame doubling at low fps to avoid vsyncing), Nvidia's g-sync scaler is still better for the time being than what any other vendor had done on the display side.
This can and hopefully will change, but the fact remains that g-sync does a better job with overdriving/ghost suppression right now.
Anybody who doesn't already have a VRR display but wants one should try to hold off for another year or so, since 4k@120Hz DisplayPort 1.3 displays will finally be out, and Pascal and Fury 2 GPUs will actually be able to drive 4k at >=60 fps.
Seriously, why spend $800 on a display that reduces tearing/judder at 40 fps when GPUs costing less than that are coming out in 6 months that are 2x more powerful than a 980Ti?
