• Upgrade to G-Sync monitor?
    14 replies, posted
Ever since I heard of G-sync, it just sounded like an idea so good I'll be amazed if it doesn't become standardized. I haven't had much to complain about with my current monitor, but now that I have better PC specs, I've got the urge to experience things like they ought to be. I guess getting a GTX 980 will do that to you. Like I said, I have an [URL="http://www.amazon.com/ASUS-VH236H-23-Inch-Full-HD-Monitor/dp/B002453K5G"]ASUS VH236H[/URL], 23 inches, LCD, at 1080 HD. It's done alright by me, though I didn't choose it myself, so I don't know where it even ranks. I can build a PC from the ground up, picking the right parts and everything, but monitors in general still evade my comprehension. What I'm hoping to get, is the ACER XB240H. [URL]http://www.amazon.com/Acer-XB240H-Abpr-24-Inch-Widescreen/dp/B00QS0AK6U/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1429191264&sr=8-1&keywords=g-sync+monitor[/URL] As far as G-sync enabled monitors, it looks the most affordable, and comfortable to my needs. I have $150 of credit on Amazon, so I can get it relatively cheap and have all the spoils that come with it. But of course, I could be persuaded, as like I said, I'm not an expert when it comes to monitors. I realize I'm only gaining an inch of screen space, and no resolution boost, but it doesn't bug me because even at 1080, modern games that come out make MY computer chug with all the spinning rims on display. With some modest AA, GTAV is capable of descending to 20 frames a second in places... with a i7 4790K, 16 gigs of DDR3, and a goddamn 980. No V-sync enabled either. Point is, I can't imagine what I would lose, even IF I wanted to scale up to 1440. Because I don't mind 1080, honestly. And when I start disabling graphics features in games, I feel... not great about it, like I'm missing part of the experience without that one feature that's eating my frames. And until Youtube videos start rising to that standard, I'm not keen on watching most vids get stretched to meet my full screen, when I could just HAVE the most standard resolution be my native. I never got the rush of some people to 4K, 1440, or even multiple damned monitors. Angry Joe recently showed off his Alienware setup, with THREE 1440 resolution monitors, running off TWO 980s in SLI configuration. Even with a much better processor and (whyever he needs it) 32 gb's of DDR4, I can't imagine his gaming experience would be great for it. His resolution and triple monitor setup almost negate all that extra power he put into it. I mean, what good is all that power if you're still playing at less-than max settings? Am I missing something? I get that at higher res, the need for AA is decreased because the jags are less apparent, but it really seems like you'd just be shooting yourself in the foot for the bragging rights of having a higher res than everybody else. And of course, I don't know which monitor brands are better or more reliable. Hell, I don't even know if LED beats out LCD for looks. I THINK it would, but I don't know. Can anyone lend me some expertise here? The student is ready to learn.
I'd recommend an Asus VG248QE (I own the 24") It is cheaper and you can use: [url]http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/[/url] which has this amazing effect of removing blur and is pretty close to having a CRT again. I say this because of the extra cost seems like it wouldn't be super beneficial as the tearing of no v-sync isn't really visible with a strobing backlight (low-persistence) from my experience. LED vs LCD is just the back-light technology. It's mostly power / heat differences / with those two. Higher resolution is nice, I've seen it in person. The big thing about screens is the panel type (e.g. TN vs IPS). And GTA V is a new release on PC and shadows are apparently a big killer according to my friends.
Well while that's cool, I'm not sure I'm convinced. I mean, motion blur never really bothered me. And I know that if I go for non g-sync, it's going to be niggling at my mind that the tearing still exists, and is just hidden by an optical trick. And I thought it was GOOD to have SOME motion blur to keep your eyes from going nuts from the refresh-rate. I'm on my computer a LOT, and something that wears me out faster isn't really what I was going for.
Acer build quality sucks balls and their warranty service is shit.
I've heard G-Sync is only worth it if you have a beast of a machine because if you dip below 60 everything goes to shit.
[QUOTE=bord2tears;47539254] LED vs LCD is just the back-light technology. It's mostly power / heat differences / with those two. [/QUOTE] You mean CCFL tube VS LED. They are both LCD, the backlight is just different. The ones where the screen actually emmits light is called OLED. Which cost 5k for a 14 inch screen a year back. [QUOTE=bord2tears;47539254] The big thing about screens is the panel type (e.g. TN vs IPS). [/QUOTE] Read this for more info. [URL="http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/faq.htm"]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/faq.htm[/URL]
[QUOTE=Scot;47539988]I've heard G-Sync is only worth it if you have a beast of a machine because if you dip below 60 everything goes to shit.[/QUOTE] That's the opposite of what I've heard. I know it DOES stop working around 30 fps, and turns on normal V-sync, but that lower frame rates are where G-sync is most effective and pronounced, and LESS apparent with constant high frame rates. Also more pronounced going from a 60hz monitor to a 144hz monitor. I think I can tweak settings to manage at least higher than 30. I don't want to be playing under 30 anyway. Don't suppose we can hear from anybody that HAS/HAD a G-sync monitor? I don't mean to be rejecting advice when I asked for it, but this has had me excited for a while.
How are you getting 20 fps in GTAV with those specs? Just asking cause I watched Totalbiscuit's recent port report and he was barely dipping under 60 fps in cities. That's with mostly everything maxed except advanced graphics on a single 980. He has a much better cpu, but that shouldn't make that much of a difference.
Your FPS is off the charts badly. My build is lesser than yours and I run it at 1600p with a steady 40-60fps. I'd take a look at your internal hardware setup and check temps, clocks, etc.
Oh normally it runs great! Anywhere in the city, I'm getting between 45 and 60, if not higher. Weirdly enough, it's when I go out into the Vinewood hills or by the forests that FPS takes a dive into the 30's or even down to the 20's. My temps are hard to track. Since I upgraded to this PC, Speedfan gives me wild and inaccurate temps, and it won't let me change the fan speeds anyway. Somehow I doubt if the cores register 34 to 40 celsius that my CPU is running at 128 Celsius. MSI Afterburner reports closer to the individual core temps, which sounds about right. The 980 is running at 47, but I'm not too worried for it. I get MSI specifically for its wicked-effective cooling systems. I never mess with clocks, because I don't trust myself not to fuck my computer somehow. My cores stay stock at 4ghz, don't know about my GPU, but I never touched it.
[QUOTE=J-Dude;47543393]Oh normally it runs great! Anywhere in the city, I'm getting between 45 and 60, if not higher. Weirdly enough, it's when I go out into the Vinewood hills or by the forests that FPS takes a dive into the 30's or even down to the 20's. My temps are hard to track. Since I upgraded to this PC, Speedfan gives me wild and inaccurate temps, and it won't let me change the fan speeds anyway. Somehow I doubt if the cores register 34 to 40 celsius that my CPU is running at 128 Celsius. MSI Afterburner reports closer to the individual core temps, which sounds about right. The 980 is running at 47, but I'm not too worried for it. I get MSI specifically for its wicked-effective cooling systems. I never mess with clocks, because I don't trust myself not to fuck my computer somehow. My cores stay stock at 4ghz, don't know about my GPU, but I never touched it.[/QUOTE] Speedfan is kinda bad actually. Try HW monitor.
Just saying, I have an i5 and 760 and get 60fps on GTAV. There's something fishy about your fps drop
[QUOTE=mark6789;47545174]Just saying, I have an i5 and 760 and get 60fps on GTAV. There's something fishy about your fps drop[/QUOTE] I'd love to know what it was, if indeed it's anything. I know I'm not on a battery saver mode or anything like that. Don't have a bunch of background programs running either, except Chrome sometimes. Got HW Monitor like was suggested. Went to a spot that brought me down to 28fps in the Vinewood hills. Here's my clocks. CPU: heaviest cores maxed at 4400mhz. GPU: Core at 540mhz, memory at 3505mhz. Uh... huh. The GPU figure is admittedly... odd. The 980 is specced to around 1300 core, and 7000 for the memory. Though, checking Afterburner, IT registered 1300 on the core, so might not be so much trouble. Both are reporting the halved GPU memory clock though. Memory USAGE report is all the way up, but the clock speed is slow...
[QUOTE=bord2tears;47539254]I'd recommend an Asus VG248QE (I own the 24") It is cheaper and you can use: [url]http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/[/url] which has this amazing effect of removing blur and is pretty close to having a CRT again. I say this because of the extra cost seems like it wouldn't be super beneficial as the tearing of no v-sync isn't really visible with a strobing backlight (low-persistence) from my experience. LED vs LCD is just the back-light technology. It's mostly power / heat differences / with those two. Higher resolution is nice, I've seen it in person. The big thing about screens is the panel type (e.g. TN vs IPS). And GTA V is a new release on PC and shadows are apparently a big killer according to my friends.[/QUOTE] All gsync monitors ship with a sequel to lightboost
Oh, whoops, okay... So the half memory clock thing IS normal. "Effective" clock is double what it actually DOES, so it sounds like I'm to spec. Who knows, maybe GTA will have all that smoothed over in the next suite of patches. I AM running about every feature on maximum, save for the bigger AA options and vsync. What can I say, GTAV has some really pretty mini-sprite based grass rendering... Back to the monitor though... I AM getting more and more apprehensive about the ACER monitors. Some of the horror stories among the worst reviews of them give me pause. Stuff about backlight bleed, dead pixels, and hellish customer support... Eh... NOW I'm tempted to go for a better brand, which will inevitably be more expensive, or else not exist on Amazon. I WANT to get something on Amazon to make use of those $150, but I don't have the budget for something $500 or more without going through Newegg, since I have a credit line with them. Damnit... always the battle for quality over the lowest bidder, when you're not exactly rich...
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.