I am in the market for a bigger monitor but the seems to be a lack of 32-34" monitors with G-Sync but plenty of Freesync monitors. So if I go the Freesu=ync route it would mean swapping GPU from Nvidia to AMD. So what would be the equivalent. Do I actually need one of these in my life? Or do I just buy a 32-34" monitor which suits my budget ETC and forget about these two? Would I am ordinary gamer with glasses actually notice any difference if I had G-Sync or Freesync?
TBH if it means getting in this deep I would go without G/freesync. Have you decided on a resolution yet?
Not sure I fully understand your post apart from the resolution question which I think I would like to keep to what I have now 2560 x 1440 or thereabouts.
Oh I see you're already on 1440p Sorry dude I thought you were on 1080p. What I meant in my post was if you have to change GPU completely just to get Freesync or Gsync then I wouldn't bother. I know I love both of them but all that messing around may not be worth it.
Off-topic, but can anyone explain in layman's terms why Free/G-sync is so special? To my mind, it just sounds like another version of V-sync, but with an outlandish pricetag and vendor exclusivity. To put it another way; What exactly would I gain by spending £XXX on a new monitor? OT: I have no idea, but it sounds like a big outlay just for one feature.
NVidia gsync requires a module (aka hardware) in the monitor whereas AMD freesync doesn't freesync uses VESA spec to achieve adaptive refresh rates , gsync uses hardware to do it - some would say gsync is the better solution , but at a price premium. afaik intel also are supporting freesync as its an open standard
Gsync requires a module that adds at least £150 to the price of a monitor. Freesync? well as long as you have the correct HDMI/DP is free. It supports VESA standard monitor connectors so as long as the port is correct there's no reason it won't work unless AMD don't want it to. So for example my Gsync monitor has the correct DP socket to basically work with Freesync. The only thing stopping it is AMD, and I would imagine Nvidia. At first OCUK were charging a premium for Freesync monitors and I was quite outspoken and critical about it. Now though? you can get a 23" 1080p monitor with it for about £99, so it's definitely alot free-er than Gsync. As HQ has said, Intel are also supporting it now too.
Decided to stay with the GTX 980 as it really is a cracking card as and rather paying a premium for G-Sync I will just get a 32-34" monitor hopefully IPS.
Both types of variable refresh rate essentially do the same thing. Instead of having a fixed refresh rate of say 60hz they allow a monitor to match your fps, they vary the refresh rate of the monitor instead of either having to resort to vsync on or vsync off and the problems associated with each of those. While G-Sync does require a module it doesn't cost that much, it adds around £50-60 to the cost of a monitor (afaik), IMO that's money well spent as G-Sync works over a much wider range than Free-Sync, obviously how much value you place on that is down to individual choice.
If you haven't got the 980 yet and want an AMD equivalent the r9 390x fits the bill, and Ebuyer are selling the Sapphire R9 390x for £320 which is £50 cheaper than the cheapest 980 I could find From the reviews I can find the 390x seems to be close and even beats the 980 depending on the game then there is also AMD's big performance increase in DX12 http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,13.html http://www.ebuyer.com/714700-sapphi...kwid=spz9FI51P_dc&pcrid=51482416379&pkw=&pmt=
Are you much of a gamer as that's mainly what there for, they both work with videos (afaik) but how noticeable the difference is compared to a fixed refresh rate display IDK.
Yes I am an avid gamer but I really do not see many 32" G-Sync monitors on the market for some reason and it does seem to add a fair chunk to the price of a monitor also. So perhaps something widescreen maybe the answer, such as the https://www.overclockers.co.uk/aoc-...escreen-super-wide-led-monitor-mo-026-ao.html which is rated well.
Yea i couldn't find a single 32" G-Sync being sold, apparently Asus and Acer are going to release some one day, although i would expect them to be very pricey.
In you original post you stated you wanted were after a bigger monitor, I assumed you meant a bigger version of your current Dell U2711 which is a 16:9 monitor. The AOC that you linked, is a 21:9 ultrawide monitor with roughly the same vertical height as your Dell U2711 (AOC H-334.8mm vs Dell H-335.66mm), as such it may not 'feel' bigger that your current Dell U2711, just wider. Edit: as a side note, you'll also lose performance going to that AOC because it's a higher resolution that your current monitor.
Not sure why you made the assumption that I was looking for a bigger version of my current Dell. Though looking at a 34" I see that it possibly within reach financially speaking.http://www.amazon.co.uk/Dell-U3415W-34-Inch-IPS-Monitor/dp/B00R420VAG and I do like a Dell monitor. Can you explain in what way performance will be affected by moving to the AOC and what then should I be looking at?
It's one of those things that one you use it, and go back, you'll only be disappointed. (Like me. I dropped a 24" GSync for a 32" 4K SIPS and wish I'd picked up a 27" GSync instead) Without VSync you get screen tearing, which is noticeable and shitty. With it you either run at 60FPS or 30FPS - big hops, not a smooth transition. G/F Sync basically stops screen tearing AND gives you smooth frame rate cycling between scenes. In my experience (since I used to work with LCD dept launching both G and F Sync monitors), G-Sync has been the better solution and first gen F Sync displays were rough around the edges. I expect things have come on a bit since then as 2nd gen parts will be shipping now. Generally speaking 1) there's been more extensive validation work on NV, which had an 18 month head start 2) the use of Nvidia's own FPGA scaler means its a highly controlled solution and 3) Nvidia has a tight list of acceptable LCD panels that can pair with their GSync chip, with a focus on the experience quality. That way of working I can respect, but ofc it puts the whole solution firmly in the premium tier which keeps a great technology out of reach. But they care about brand position more - and when it's your name, your tech being scrutinized you want control over it. Not the vendors who will squeeze every $ out of it. As good as open standards are for lowering the price, they are also open to some level of engineering interpretation - and the performance of each scaler IC varies. Working is not the same as working well (see all USB thumb drives, JFC!). And each IC interacts with x number of TFT panels in different ways because of different response rates, firmware customizations, colour setups etcetcetc This increases the validation and driver work AMD has to do for each display, each card, which takes time (if it's even done at all for smaller vendors). The other trouble is that as FreeSync becomes ubiquitous manufacturers will try to shave off $ by $ to retain margins but still winning on price, so you'll end up with more likely unsuitable pairings of cheaper LCDs and cheaper 'it works' FSync ICs (and no one tells you what IC is inside). Yet the sticker on the box still says FreeSync, so it should be good as one 50% more expensive, right? Free is not free.
