Hi, I'm sick of the tearing happening in games on my old 22" Samsung 226 LCD. I was wondering if this problem goes away if I buy one of the new monitors, boasting LED, 120HZ, 1-2MS etc. Or does one still have to use Vsync on the new ones too? That isn't really an option in shooter-games as I feel it makes the mouse laggy. best regards stoff3r.
You can buy a 1,000,000,000Hz monitor and you'll still have plenty of tearing. The only fix is to use VSync. When using VSync (unless you have a GTX 600 series which can turn on/off VSYnc on the fly based on the how the games plays (fps)), you have 2 possible FPS when gaming: 60fps, or 30fps (or 15fps.. but that would obviously be unplayable). If you have a 120Hz monitor, you can enjoy 120fps as long as you have the GPU power to play your games at 120fps in the first place. If right now, your games can't reach 120fps most of the time... expect that you will not enjoy your 120Hz, as it will be exactly like a 60Hz monitor. Are my games going to be unplayable at 30fps? No. If the fps is steady, the games will seams to running smooth as butter.. ok well almost. Of course, side by side, 60fps game will look better, but when you have a constant fps, you see it as smooth experience. That is why console gamers don't complain at all. Most games on consoles runs at 30fps (except the WiiU (well expected, we will see how it plays out)) because it's a solid 30fps, you don't see any choppiness and you see everything smoothly. Heck even when I play most of my games on PC, the few I play on my console I honestly don't see the difference.
Thank you for your ansver. Is tearing noticeable on tv's when gaming xbox for instance? Or are the games there vsynced? On Battlefield 3 my fps is mostly over 85, but never 100-120. I guess if I turn some things on medium I can run it with vsync on. I'll try that now
Your TV will act like your monitor. Tearing is possible. All gaming consoles have VSync forced ON. That is why when Nintendo said that if you activate and connect the second WiiU game controller (the one with the screen), games can only be playable at most 30fps. The console might be doing 55fps.. but as VSync is on, it must go down to 30fps instead of 60fps, and that is something I don't get from people that complain and sees this as a down side (especially that most of the game they play now on console are 30fps).
You're playing with a reasonably high frame rate with vsync off. Thats why you are getting tearing. Turn vsync on. As long as you are getting over 60fps you should be fine. Its when the frame rate drops below 60 you get issues with vsync. Theres no need to lower your settings if you get around 85fps
So i tried it just turned down AA. It went mostly ok with the fps locked to 60 (had render.drawfps 1 activated so i could see the fps) what troubled me was that some times the fps was 59 or even 56-57. Shouldn't vsync mean that it's either 60 or 30? 56 makes no sense.... The mouse was somewhat slover, but maybe I can get used to it.....
What graphics card are you running? GTX500 series also offer adaptive vsync with this years drivers. Best of both worlds.
I suspect you'd see less tearing at 120hz than at 60hz as i think that would let you run at up to 120fps without seeing any.
Not all graphics cards can maintain 60fps at max settings hence vsig can't be at 60 A 680 will cope with most games at 1920x1080 with 60fps at max settings but not all ( bf3 ultra ( Crysis been the main 2 both will require detail reduction if you demand 60 fps
I have the gtx 580, but i haven't updated the driver in the past months , might have to do that. Adaptive vsync was one of the things that really sounded nice on the new drivers i remember.
You can use D3DOverrider to enable Triple Buffering in (so far only in 32 bit) most games, essentially this will use a 3rd frame buffer to make smooth things out so you won't be stuck with either 30 or 60 fps, you can go everywhere in between and below, On the down side some people say this introduces a very slight latency but I'm happy playing single player games with it. As for adaptive Vsync, so far I've noticed it limits the FPS to 60 but you still get tearing sometimes below this, better but not perfect, a sort of half way house as there is no latency issues. Asrock are currently promoting their own version which eliminates tearing without limiting the framerate. Not sure if it has anything to do with Lucid Tech or not...
You are drawing 3 frame in advance with triple buffering. This doesn't solve the issue. It helps with sudden drops... but not fix. If your GPU struggles for 35fps.. then your game will go at 30fps due to VSync. It does. But that depends on people, as you mentioned. It is from Lucid. All I can see it does, is because this software take render frame from the graphic card and forces in Intel memory, making the Intel GPU think it already render the frame and just displaying it. It allows your Nvidia/AMD graphic card to do =all the work, and at every 60fps, it comes in, takes 1 frame from the GPU memory, and give it to the Intel GPU to render. The down side to this is: -> This is a false fix. The games goes to higher than 60fps... but you only see 60fps tops (assuming VSync ON on a 60Hz monitor) So this solution does nothing more than fool your FPS. -> While it does fix the input lag issue that some extreme FPS hardcore player sees, it does use the system bus a lot, to transfer the frame from the dedicated GPU to Intel memory space. As only 1 thing can use the system bus per cycle.. it will reduce performance. SLI/Crossfire uses a connector bridge, you know why? To avoid using your system bus when it passes the rendered frames from the secondary GPU's to the primary to output to your screen. P.S: Fraps sucks big time at measuring FPS. When you enable FPS counts in a game, and show Fraps measurements you can see a big gap between the two. The reason for this, is that Fraps uses code injection to try and measure and display the counter. I am a little disappointed that such company, claim to aim solution to gamers, uses that i their video to show how their thing performance. Use the real in game one, or make your own program.
I've noticed that fraps is usually 1fps higher than Futuremark benchmarks, probably due to different companies using different rounding techniques. Otherwise I've noticed it pretty much sync up with every in game fps counter, except the in game ones tend to update much faster whereas fraps takes an average for that second and displays it every second. As for Lucid's tech, I'd have to play/feel it for myself before I could make a judgement.
So in summary; triple buffering is good, if one can cope with slight delay (I've noticed this in Portal 2, but it's livable). In BF3 it doesn't say if it's tripple buffered or not? I notice slight mouse-lag there too and that is not good enough online. I know LED is just LCD, but I was more hoping to find out if theres been an evolution on LCD in the 5-6 years since I bought the samsung. Like for instance new ways to draw frames, but I guess that's where 120hz comes in, doubling the speed of the images on screen. There should be a way to sync the screen to the current FPS 8)
the tech isnt there yet what id recommend for heavy gamers ( or pro gamers ) would be a low ms 120hz screen. Dell U2312HM ( one of the lowest MS rated screens 0.6ms rating ( but not 120hz )) samsung 950D is considered the best pure gaming monitor out there problem is finding one in stock and at a resonable price ( nearly £500 on amazon ) personally prefer a dell monitor and sacrafice a few things for a better all round experience than just something that is great for games and little else. End of this month LG IPS monitor is out no clue on cost but it should be great for the task at hand. Best budget is benq 120hz its like £200
I don't know where your monitor is placed in all this, but the evolution in monitor are just improvements. - New TN panel technology (usually refereed as high-end, as they are the better ones, and cost more) are presented, which offers a bit better horizontal view angles (170), and better colors. - MVA did a come back with BenQ producing them. - PVA got performance improvements - IPS is where it did some major leap: They reduce significantly in price. They got significantly faster. Now they are great for gaming, however, may not be suitable for hardcore FPS gamers yet. eIPS panel (economy-IPS) penetrated the market, in offering a really inexpensive solution to those who seek something better than a high-end TN panel, while not spend much more. Their competitive pricing are at, or a few dollars more over, a high-end TN panel. So it's getting a lot of attention. Especially, that IPS panels manufactures are not releasing them faster than mushrooms, and clean up after themselves (remove old models). It makes it easier for the consumer to know what is new and what is old, and have a better time to see the differences, compare, and checkout reviews. - PLS monitor made an introduction. It's Samsung take on IPS panels. Has strength and weaknesses. No major differences between PLS and IPS (we are talking about a 5-10% difference in some aspect, some good, some bad). Of course, you have 120Hz computer monitors, which are all TN based. Right-now, what is popular on this forum are LG eIPS and H-IPS panels. People tend to buy LG own products or Dell's which uses LG panels. H-IPS panels offers visibly much better colors, and a bit of reduction on backlight bleeding side compared to eIPS panels. Usually H-IPS panel have the most input lag as they feature a color processor to take advantage of it's ability to display better colors, while the eIPS panels, like TN and MVA, don't have one (so lower input lag for them). Of course, due to the color processor in H-IPS panels, the cost of these monitor are higher. However, H-IPS panels usually have about a 6ms response time, reviewers note that it beats many/most 1-2ms response time monitors. Why? It usually has to do the way they measure the response rate speed. As the measurements are gray to gray, the manufacture can pick any 2 gray color they want.. even the same one (1ms?). So they are lying... but that's life. Check reviews before buying, and don't jump in conclusion that 1-2ms response time monitor is better than a lower one.
