"Adaptive V-Sync" basically means if the FPS wants to be over the monitor refresh rate, sync it, if not, don't, since if you try to sync at a framerate just under the refresh rate of the monitor, you end up with HALF of the framerate your monitor can handle. (59 FPS becomes 30 FPS on a 60 Hz monitor.)

"Triple Buffering" is a much older methodology that unfortunately has never been well adopted following the advent of hardware acceleration, thus why Adaptive V-Sync even exists, but what it does is buffers the frame that's about to be rendered and renders it immediately after a vertical sync occurs, while allowing the game itself to continue doing its thing. Triple Buffering basically gives you the FPS potential of non-vsyncing with the anti-shearing of vsyncing.

Either way you slice it though, the moment you try to sync one framerate to another that doesn't evenly match up, you break the perception of that framerate. Without syncing, this results in shearing. With syncing, this results in frame jitter that makes the player perceive a lesser framerate than they're actually getting.

I do agree though that even though G-Sync is a step in the right direction to eliminate these problems forever, it's gonna need to become an industry standard and not just a proprietary format before it becomes anything more than a novelty.

I have just tried the adaptive VSYNC method and it sucks for me because the tearing is still there. It makes me dizzy.

eL_PuSHeR wrote:

offtopic: […]
Show full quote

offtopic:

because many people (specially with Fermi cards) are getting lot of stability problems when updating beyond 314.22

And back on topic...

Newer nVidia driver has an "adpative VSYNC" option. I have to try that. As for the hardware thing (G-SYNC) I have seen that it comes with ASUS monitors so far. I pretty dislike ASUS. In fact, I have an ASUS monitor at work and it's one of the worst I have ever seen. So no ASUS for me, thank you. And my main issue is that this tech is probably propietary. Unless it should be adopted by VESA or ISO standards institute is a no go for me.

You do realize that 95% of all LCD panels made are made by about 2 companies right? i'm willing to bet your panel was made by one of these three: Sharp, Samsung, LG.

I will probably never buy an Nvidia product. Not until they allow their cards to work alongside of ATI. You want to see physx take off? Do what VHS did, give it to everyone cheap! Sure they might not get the 2nd hand sales, but I'm certain the customer will see the value of a card with a strong 2nd hard market.

eL_PuSHeR wrote:

I have just tried the adaptive VSYNC method and it sucks for me because the tearing is still there. It makes me dizzy.

As stated, all Adaptive V-Sync does is make it so that if the framerate drops below your monitor refresh rate, it will stop vsyncing so that the framerate doesn't drop even further and will only sync if above the refresh rate... and this is presuming the game you're playing is not overriding GPU sync handling in the first place. :P

The only way to avoid screen tearing with contemporary hardware and graphics cards is to go with straight V-Syncing. (Though Triple Buffering is even better when it's supported, but typically only works in full-screen modes when it is.)

VSync with a higher than 60Hz refresh rate works very well.

Many LCDs can be run at 75Hz or worst case get a 120Hz model.

At higher refresh rates input lag is also much less of an issue.

To get 120 fps in games CPUs are holding things back. It takes a heavily overclocked CPU in many cases to sustain that level of performance.

luckybob wrote:

eL_PuSHeR wrote:

offtopic: […]
Show full quote

offtopic:

because many people (specially with Fermi cards) are getting lot of stability problems when updating beyond 314.22

And back on topic...

Newer nVidia driver has an "adpative VSYNC" option. I have to try that. As for the hardware thing (G-SYNC) I have seen that it comes with ASUS monitors so far. I pretty dislike ASUS. In fact, I have an ASUS monitor at work and it's one of the worst I have ever seen. So no ASUS for me, thank you. And my main issue is that this tech is probably propietary. Unless it should be adopted by VESA or ISO standards institute is a no go for me.

You do realize that 95% of all LCD panels made are made by about 2 companies right? i'm willing to bet your panel was made by one of these three: Sharp, Samsung, LG.

I will probably never buy an Nvidia product. Not until they allow their cards to work alongside of ATI. You want to see physx take off? Do what VHS did, give it to everyone cheap! Sure they might not get the 2nd hand sales, but I'm certain the customer will see the value of a card with a strong 2nd hard market.

What they need to do is go back to marketing a Phys-X only card in PCI or PCIe x1 like they were sold originally, and yes, don't make them dependent on nVidia being the only brand of video card in the system. Then you'll really see nVidia raking in the money.

Some Nvidia propaganda showcasing the differences: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiZ9l3I26ec

I really enjoyed this video. I will likely get such a monitor because it's something I always wanted. I have always played with VSync and tweaked settings to hit that constant 60 fps all the time.

I just bought a new LCD a while ago with about the best image quality currently possible with the technology (not counting professional monitors), so no G-Sync stuff for me anytime soon 😀 however, it's still good that some companies even start to mention the tearing issue. They talked a lot about cinematic effects in the past yet if anything about games is not cinematic this is certainly it...

Cinematic = set LCD to 24 Hz and enable VSync 😀

Mau1wurf1977 wrote:

Cinematic = set LCD to 24 Hz and enable VSync 😀

Sounds painful 🤣

http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/362115,nvi … Latest+Articles

As expected... only for Asus monitors until Q3 2014. Incidentally, Eizo just released a "240 Hz" gaming monitor that looks very neat. 23.5" and 1080p will put off most at first but when looking closer at it, real 120 Hz or 240 Hz w/ black frames inbetween on a decent panel is revolutionary at this point in time...

Hmmm...so mabye in 2 years I can buy a decent 2560x1600 res monitor with G-Sync that a single GPU can power @ close to 60fps.

Purchased a Geforce 780 yesterday so I should be good until then at the same ol' 1920x1200 I''ve been gaming at since 2007.

But supposedly you can mod a current monitor with G-Sync so we'll see how those rumours turn out.

DosFreak wrote:

But supposedly you can mod a current monitor with G-Sync so we'll see how those rumours turn out.

I've never seen actual evidence of that, I think people misunderstood/misinterpreted the graphics presented at the press release and interpreted that it would be an option. I really really doubt it based on what's been said.

There will be a kit for upgrading specific monitors, but it's not like it will work with any monitor that's out there right now... the cards are on some kind of PCI resembling slot.

The Eizo one I've linked will stomp the first batch of G-Sync monitors... it's apparently the same technology that was in a professional grade monitor they've shown 2 months ago or so, it's just that it cost seven grand. This one's still on the expensive side with 650 bucks right now... people who have it already say it's the first ever LCD that can take on CRTs in basically all aspects, which is quite amazing for it to have taken this long.

Review
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7582/nvidia-gsync-review