| Page 1 of 1 |
|
|
 Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 11:15 Post subject: G-Sync 2016 |
|
 |
I made a thread about this years ago, and it seemed that not many people had experienced these types of monitors. Has anyone got one now?
I'm thinking about forgoing SLI (since my GPUs haven't shipped yet) and trying one out.
This one is the same price as one of the GPUs I ordered to the dollar:
http://www.scorptec.com.au/product/Monitors/25+_inch/61282-PG279Q/?member_pricing=true
Pay no mind to the price, our dollar is shit and we're generally overcharged for imported items. The main thing I want to know about is if they work and exactly what it feels like.
Obviously that one might be overkill, but I need the monitor to be 1440p and IPS for work.
Does anyone have such a monitor who can comment?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 12:10 Post subject: |
|
|
Can I get a G-sync monitor which is significantly better than the Dell Ultrasharp U2311H for around 200 euros? Nothing above 1080p though, since I don't plan on upgrading my 970 for a few years.
My Dell is very good, but it has some bad backlight bleeding.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 12:20 Post subject: |
|
|
Last edited by Interinactive on Mon, 4th Oct 2021 23:11; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 12:45 Post subject: |
|
|
Every panel is a lottery I'm afraid, even when spending big bucks. There isn't a 'perfect' one out there. I've done the Dell lottery many times and it's a painful process to go through.
The ACER I have ATM, exhibited a few of the problems most were having with it, with bleeding being the worst case. When mine arrived I was in two minds whether to send it back, but glad I didn't, as once the monitor had settled in (about a week), it showed no signs of the initial bleeding that was there when first turned on. Now it's perfect, that is, perfect to me 
Sometimes, I think people are too quick to dismiss things, and if first impressions don't measure up, then it just won't be good enough at all. Some things in life need a chance, but yeah, the monitor lottery is a big pain these days, with QC being virtually non-existent.
Good luck, you will need it
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 12:55 Post subject: |
|
|
"All" (for as far as there are any anymore) the G-Sync monitors suffer from panel lottery. It's only ASUS doing them anymore, ACER doesn't have any new ones lined up, as far as I can tell they're jumping ship too. And neither of them is a real manufacturer, their QC is crap. The ACER is probably the best one.
G-Sync and FreeSync do work though, at least under 60 FPS. It makes 45 FPS feel pretty good, as long as it's stable. If the framerate fluctuates a lot or has hard drops it'll still feel like crap though.
And G-Sync for €200 
Keep dreaming Mister_s, never going to happen. Nvidia charge too much for their shitty scaler for that to be possible. €200 leaves about €120 for the rest of the monitor. No margin to be made on that. You'll have to wait for them to realise that it's dead (because it is) and they start supporting Adaptive Sync under the G-Sync brand so that "FreeSync" monitors work with Nvidia.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 13:01 Post subject: |
|
|
Last edited by Interinactive on Mon, 4th Oct 2021 23:11; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 13:19 Post subject: |
|
|
Not really, the technology works. It's just that you'll have to take the panel lottery and other QC issues for granted. It's ridiculous for the amount of money, but that's how it is.
ASUS and ACER quite simply are not the best brands to buy monitors from and sadly, not only is Nvidia's scaler incredibly expensive compared to other ones, they've also gone full retard on the price. That ACER monitor is a €500 monitor at best (in terms of specs; with it being ACER I'd substract 20% or more compared to a Dell or Eizo  ). The €250-€300 extra markup on it comes partly from the scaler price, but mostly just because they can.
Unfortunately, Nvidia aren't ones to realise very quickly that their tech is dead. They kept trying to push 3D until long after it had died out, so it's still going to take a while for them to flip the switch and support Adaptive Sync outright. Until they do, you'll have to deal with the above.
It's not really Nvidia versus AMD btw, it's Nvidia versus everyone else. They have no exclusive G-Sync partners, the only one that I'm sure is staying with them (ASUS) makes Adaptive Sync monitors too. Intel will be supporting Adaptive Sync going forward. In terms of monitor manufacturers, every major brand has at least one Adaptive Sync model at this point, except Dell and I have it on good authority that the next refresh of the Ultrasharps will have it.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34984
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 15:05 Post subject: |
|
|
So what caused G-Sync to fall behind? Is Nvidia charging that much for their scaler or is the scaler itself not that good?
(Does it actually do anything special at all? Or is it just some chip with closed Nvidia code in it?)
AMD probably avoided some of these issues by allowing FreeSync as some sort of open display standard (Though optional at first.) and allowing manufacturers to do their own scalers.
(I think it's still optional for DP1.3+ no? and the same for HDMI1.3+ as well?)
If it's just a open standard couldn't Nvidia just add code support for it in their drivers and then FreeSync monitors would work with their GPU's as well?
(It doesn't really seem too different besides the supported refresh rate range and that seems mainly driver controlled from what I've read though it can't exceed the monitors capabilities of course, though I'm unsure if the monitors can be "overclocked" to increase the refresh rate further.)
I thought G-Sync started out pretty strong with a couple of "gaming" oriented monitor manufacturers jumping on it but then again Nvidia didn't have any competition initially either with this technique but then it seems these companies have gradually moved away from G-Sync and towards FreeSync though there's still G-Sync monitors developed.
(Has G-Sync and it's hardware had any improvements or is it mainly the monitors themselves and what they're capable of?)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 15:16 Post subject: |
|
|
Any chance of proper OLED monitors hitting the 300 euros mark soon? If not, I think I'll just hunt for a used IPS monitor. I think the bleeding is getting worse on mine, it didn't bother me this much in the past.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34984
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 15:19 Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah would be nice to see OLED catching on and prices of such monitors come down in price as it seems to be a pretty good technique though is it still having that issue with color degradation or what it was?
(Something about the blue color degrading faster or something.)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 15:33 Post subject: |
|
|
| JBeckman wrote: | So what caused G-Sync to fall behind? Is Nvidia charging that much for their scaler or is the scaler itself not that good?
(Does it actually do anything special at all? Or is it just some chip with closed Nvidia code in it?) |
Both.
The scaler has dropped in price somewhat, but Nvidia still charges manufacturers effectively a retail price. Compared to a scaler from Novatek, Realtek or MStar (who provide pretty much the scalers in every other monitor) you're looking at 10 times as much in some cases.
The scaler itself is mediocre at best. It lacks a lot of the IQ control logic that the bigger manufacturers put in their own scalers. Paying such a huge margin for a product that's inferior to your own just to support a feature that's not present on all potential customers is not something they like, as margins on monitors aren't that great.
| Quote: | AMD probably avoided some of these issues by allowing FreeSync as some sort of open display standard (Though optional at first.) and allowing manufacturers to do their own scalers.
(I think it's still optional for DP1.3+ no? and the same for HDMI1.3+ as well?) |
Allowing FreeSync as an open standard? Allowing manufacturers to do their own scalers? What?
AMD developed a proof of concept and then wrote a standard around that. They submitted that to VESA (which ironically includes Nvidia), they reviewed and tweaked it and then accepted it. That standard is called Adaptive Sync.
FreeSync is just AMD's implementation of that standard; FreeSync is not the standard nor is it anything but a marketing name for having Adaptive Sync support.
AMD has not done a scaler at any point. They have only written part of the spec and their own software support for it. This is where Nvidia fucked up, they can not bear to not be in full control for some reason, so they jumped into yet another hardware market that they have no experience in. They tried it with Icera and failed.
And yes, it's still optional in 1.3+.
| Quote: | | If it's just a open standard couldn't Nvidia just add code support for it in their drivers and then FreeSync monitors would work with their GPU's as well? |
Yes they could and I suspect that they will. And then rebrand G-Sync to cover Adaptive Sync support. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 15:40 Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think there are any OLED monitors out there at all. End of this year or next year we should supposedly see something, but first ones will cost you way more than 300€, so you can forget about that. It's still pretty much cutting-edge/premium tech... at these sizes at least.
Pixel degradation/burn in is very much an issue with OLEDs which is one of the reasons you don't see many of those as PC monitors.
The future is with QLEDs now, apparently - benefits of OLED with no degradation. But those are a few years away.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34984
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 15:43 Post subject: |
|
|
| Werelds wrote: | | JBeckman wrote: | So what caused G-Sync to fall behind? Is Nvidia charging that much for their scaler or is the scaler itself not that good?
(Does it actually do anything special at all? Or is it just some chip with closed Nvidia code in it?) |
Both.
The scaler has dropped in price somewhat, but Nvidia still charges manufacturers effectively a retail price. Compared to a scaler from Novatek, Realtek or MStar (who provide pretty much the scalers in every other monitor) you're looking at 10 times as much in some cases.
The scaler itself is mediocre at best. It lacks a lot of the IQ control logic that the bigger manufacturers put in their own scalers. Paying such a huge margin for a product that's inferior to your own just to support a feature that's not present on all potential customers is not something they like, as margins on monitors aren't that great.
| Quote: | AMD probably avoided some of these issues by allowing FreeSync as some sort of open display standard (Though optional at first.) and allowing manufacturers to do their own scalers.
(I think it's still optional for DP1.3+ no? and the same for HDMI1.3+ as well?) |
Allowing FreeSync as an open standard? Allowing manufacturers to do their own scalers? What?
AMD developed a proof of concept and then wrote a standard around that. They submitted that to VESA (which ironically includes Nvidia), they reviewed and tweaked it and then accepted it. That standard is called Adaptive Sync.
FreeSync is just AMD's implementation of that standard; FreeSync is not the standard nor is it anything but a marketing name for having Adaptive Sync support.
AMD has not done a scaler at any point. They have only written part of the spec and their own software support for it. This is where Nvidia fucked up, they can not bear to not be in full control for some reason, so they jumped into yet another hardware market that they have no experience in. They tried it with Icera and failed.
And yes, it's still optional in 1.3+.
| Quote: | | If it's just a open standard couldn't Nvidia just add code support for it in their drivers and then FreeSync monitors would work with their GPU's as well? |
Yes they could and I suspect that they will. And then rebrand G-Sync to cover Adaptive Sync support. |
Thanks for the answers I need to read up on it a bit it seems, I keep mixing up the terms a bit.
(I also need to keep the actual implementation separate from AMD's name of how they support it, I keep thinking of it as the same but yeah it's two separate things.)
EDIT: Wonder where Nvidia will go from here, they're slowly making some of the techniques in shaders and PhysX open via Github (But I think you need to apply to their Git group for access to that.) though now they're making that Ansel software (Part driver and part coded for the game itself.) and various VR implementations.
(But we'll just have to see, it's a separate thing from this about G-Sync.)
EDIT: Well I guess it kinda hinges on how much of the market AMD can take back again, both from the GPU-side with Nvidia and then CPU-side with Intel, we could do with some proper competition I guess although AMD seems to focus primarily on the mid-end section at the moment though in addition to that they also have licenses for console GPU's for both Sony and Microsoft (And Nintendo?) which is something Nvidia for some reason wasn't too interested in.
(Although from what Werelds mentioned in a recent post elsewhere it doesn't seem to be that bad a deal for AMD so no idea what Nvidia's reasons were.)
Last edited by JBeckman on Fri, 17th Jun 2016 15:55; edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 15:50 Post subject: |
|
|
I think the idea was to ensure when someone buys a gsync monitor, it's unlikely they will then buy a competing product. We're lucky there's an open standard so we can't get fucked in future buying monitors.
Stuff like this sucks, like if AMD could have licensed physx or something that technology would have taken off and we would be better off. Instead we get gameworks no developer truly embraces the technology it dies and we all miss out.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nui
VIP Member
Posts: 5720
Location: in a place with fluffy towels
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 15:51 Post subject: |
|
|
AFAIK on OLED:
Different colors degrade differently. And since this technology doesn't use a backlight as a degrading part, pixels or rather subpixel degrade individually making uneven wear or burn a problem.
LG TVs already have a mechanism to combat this, supposedly tech by ignis (click on max life here http://www.ignisinnovation.com/technology/)
In fact if you turn them off after a while of usage they'll run a program to balance performance and it works to a degree.
The other issue is that the light output is controlled directly by voltage which changes noticeably with the length of the electric path way (meaning naive panels get darker to the sides) and generally cause uniformity issues. These issues are only relevant with dark enough content, otherwise the differences are not big enough. And you can see lots and lots of images of uniformity issue ridden LG displays. All of these problems should get better with age thanks the program above, but it can take a while and i'm not sure its guaranteed.
These aren't strictly OLED problems though. The last part is an issue with TFT and would affect LCD as well. I guess one does not notice that as much, as they are backlight controlled and don't get dark anyhow.
And tbh I don't think we should assume QLED would just change any of this. It should suffer from the same problems really, perhaps with a different magnitude. LCDs are "better" in this aspect, because it has a backlight, which is it's largest failure as a display tech as well.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 17:24 Post subject: |
|
|
OLED lifetime is not really the same as as with LED backlight though - the former degrade relatively quickly.
With QDs you can potentially solve the aging problem of organic LEDs, while keeping the advantage of self emitting pixels. This being a couple of years away, we will have to see if they will actually get there.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nui
VIP Member
Posts: 5720
Location: in a place with fluffy towels
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nui
VIP Member
Posts: 5720
Location: in a place with fluffy towels
|
| Posted: Fri, 17th Jun 2016 18:08 Post subject: |
|
|
Supposedly... these advantages of QLED are all qualities that have been advertised for OLED as well. Cheap, efficient, stable, fast, bla bla bla. And most of them still are, saying that they would simply require some more research. Part of that research for OLED, or rather for the backplane would be helpful for QLED as well.
Anyway. Without proof or actual I try not too read too much into these things. LG says OLED is super, but researches QD as well. Samsung says OLED sucks (I would too if I couldn't manufacture them, while LG is running away with it )
The price of OLED btw was already within range of my current display, because some of the 1080p OLEDs were already below $2000.
With 4k it's gotten worse of course, but not really worse than LCD btw. Those "good" LCD TVs are actually more expensive. Some of the TV owners already use their OLED TV as a monitor btw and claim no problems.
It's time someone besides LG Display produces OLEDs though. That is my biggest problem.
kogel mogel
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 27th Jun 2016 12:21 Post subject: |
|
|
i have a Dell S2716DG: 144Hz G-SYNC WQHD 1ms Gaming Monitor, its a Tn panel though but for the price i got this £319 (misspriced) now around £480 paired up with a HOF 980ti 8 Pack Edition gtx it's awesome. No stuttering or screen tearing anymore!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyb3r
Posts: 615
Location: USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Mon, 27th Jun 2016 23:00 Post subject: |
|
|
| Cyb3r wrote: | i use the mg279q which uses a tn panel by aou aka guys that don't know what quality controll is at all  it's sad to see that the only 144hz and higher panels are just a pure loterry i got kinda lucky with mine one dead pixel (on the right barely noticable unless you know exactly where it is) and one pixel that doesn't know what green is but for the rest i got lucky with 0 backlight bleed
Which is not something most can say with the aou panels  |
It's not TN, it's AHVA (AUO's version of IPS).
And AUO is a fine panel manufacturer; ASUS just don't pay for grade A+ panels (or AUO has them reserved for someone else, which is just as likely)  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyb3r
Posts: 615
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Mon, 27th Jun 2016 23:01 Post subject: |
|
|
@werelds thnx for the info but other manifucturers had similar problems with that panel
Case: Nanoxia Deep Silence 6 (Black) | MB: Msi X99A Gaming 9 | CPU: i7 5960x
CPU Cooling(temp): Corsair 110i Gtx | PSU: Evga Supernova 1000w | GPU: Gigabyte G1 Gaming 980ti 6gb | RAM: 16gb Ripjaws 4 3200mhz | Screen: Asus MG279Q / LG 23" Ips
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
