[PCPER] NVidia G-sync

[96Firebird]

They may be interested in the technology, but not interested in the implementation right now. Hopefully the technology expands into better quality monitors.

 

[Keysplayr]

They may be interested in the technology, but not interested in the implementation right now. Hopefully the technology expands into better quality monitors.

You mean as in not TN? Petersen said the monitor type doesn't matter unless it doesn't use LVDS. So I take that to mean that any panel type (TN, IPS, other) using LVDS standard. So, between ASUS, Viewsonic, BenQ, and others he could not name yet, I think the bases are pretty well covered.

 

[Keysplayr]

I just knew from when they claimed there was a hardware component in the gpu required for this to work, that they have zero intention of having anyone with anything but a supported nvidia gpu be able to use this

Your cult could make more money from this in the long run simply by putting this forward as the industry standard and getting paid a royalty for every monitor sold.More money than they're going to make between now and the time an open alternative arises

What cult? The technology cult?

 

[Teizo]

You mean as in not TN? Petersen said the monitor type doesn't matter unless it doesn't use LVDS. So I take that to mean that any panel type (TN, IPS, other) using LVDS standard. So, between ASUS, Viewsonic, BenQ, and others he could not name yet, I think the bases are pretty well covered.

So 2500x1600/1444, IPS should be possible?

Well then...

 

[toyota]

They'd be lying. There isn't ANY reason NOT to like it. There isn't anything negative about it. It virtually eliminates stuttering, tearing, lag issues from using V-Sync. There isn't anything not to like other than not having an Nvidia capable card. At the moment. Them being IQ junkies is even more of a reason they would love this.

actually it doesnt work correctly with some games so its not 100% perfect but nothing ever is.

 

[Keysplayr]

actually it doesnt work correctly with some games so its not 100% perfect but nothing ever is.

This is true. A very small percentage of games deal with timing differently. Though I could not tell you which games those are.

 

[MaestroQuark]

Which games would those be? Why would software have any influence on this at all?

 

[toyota]

Which games would those be? Why would software have any influence on this at all?

watch the pcper video Tom Peterson for an explanation but he does not say which games. they will be locked out of profiles so you wont have to worry about finding out the hard way.

 

[BrightCandle]

actually it doesnt work correctly with some games so its not 100% perfect but nothing ever is.

Some games have gone out of their way to try and solve the vsync issue in other ways. Likely by forcing particular timing standard into the game rather than allowing the DirectX API and its blocking call for present to regulate their frame rate. There aren't many such games that I know of (Dark souls unmodded might be one being stuck at 30fps).

I don't know what people expected any company to do to introduce this? It isn't possible for just NVidia to do this on their own, it requires hardware at the GPU side and the monitor side because it mostly affects the interface between the two. That module is a programmable chip which is why its so expensive. Its a prototype and not designed for high volumes like their GPUs as its uneconomical to do it that way. Nvidia already had a lot of trouble getting monitor companies to make this and build a module for the monitors and do the necessary things in their own hardware and drivers, as shown by the fact they have had GPUs capable of this for 1.5 years and didn't manage to release the monitors and module until last week. Going to all the monitor companies, all the GPU companies and trying to get the standard changed well that is basically impossible, it would take a lot longer. If it had been possible it would have been done for the displayport standard to begin with, because everyone in the industry has known about the legacy issues of vsync for a very long time. Its not a new idea to replace vsync, its over a decade a old as a problem brought to LCD for backwards compatibility. I view this as NVidia got tired of waiting and decided to prove the market would buy a replacement and it targeted its core gamer market.

The sad reality is that standards stifle innovation but bring a fair competitive market place once things have settled. Both in the standards and outside are necessary to make progress and this was a tough change to sell until everyone sees it. I frankly would prefer to have access to this soon but with the limitations we have than wait 10 years or never see it because NVidia chose to go the standards route and failed. Heck maybe they already did and got shot down and decided to prove the point that the market wants this by releasing it in a more limited fashion? We wont ever know unless it wins.

Displayport and extensions too it are not propriety in the same way as Mantle or PhysX, its not even remotely the same thing. Its a display interface with no royalties associated with it and I doubt they can charge royalties on their extension either. There is no patent covering the GPU side to produce this variable rate interface (that anyone has found so far) and the module itself is a prototype that I suspect will be replaced with proper silicon if it takes off and that will have to be designed and built by the monitor manufactureres. Its a pain its only NVidia, but they had to start somewhere. I just don't see any real evidence to tell me this will end up NVidia only in the future. I also don't see how else they could have done it. I just want to make sure they don't get this wrong.

 

[Keysplayr]

So 2500x1600/1444, IPS should be possible?

Well then...

Yup. It was noted that G-Sync doesn't care about resolution. Only when the frame is ready to be scanned and when it gets scanned.

 

[railven]

They'd be lying. There isn't ANY reason NOT to like it. There isn't anything negative about it. It virtually eliminates stuttering, tearing, lag issues from using V-Sync. There isn't anything not to like other than not having an Nvidia capable card. At the moment. Them being IQ junkies is even more of a reason they would love this.

Well that's very arrogant of you. Since your an NV focus member tell me and I will pass it on to them that this tech will work with their pioneer kuro elites and Panasonic's vt60s.

If you're going to tell me this is only limited to desktop monitors I already know their responses - "I don't want to be hunched over a desk playing games."

But sure they must be lying. Gotcha.

 

[Keysplayr]

Well that's very arrogant of you. Since your an NV focus member tell me and I will pass it on to them that this tech will work with their pioneer kuro elites and Panasonic's vt60s.

If you're going to tell me this is only limited to desktop monitors I already know their responses - "I don't want to be hunched over a desk playing games."

But sure they must be lying. Gotcha.

Interesting Railven. You interpret ALL this, into them being zero interested in this technology. You could have mentioned these people Arent your conventional gamers from the very beginning? Perhaps? Or did you want to rile me up first?
And it's not arrogance, Railven. Its called being mislead by you.
Any gaming enthusiast who claims they aren't interested in a technology that eliminates stutter, tearing, lag, please introduce me to them.
I don't care what monitor they are currently using. The potential is there for them to use it even if they CANT right now.
Anything else that you'd failed to mention, I'd appreciate knowing now.
And I can guarantee you that these 8 people, no matter what screen they are using, get stutter, tearing or lagging if Vsync is used. Still don't think they might be interested? Why don't you bring them around so we can chat.

 

[Mark Rejhon]

And also, we do not yet know what else these G-Sync boards are capable of. You saw Tom Petersen absolutely NOT answer Scott Wasson's question regarding the 768MB of memory (at least that we can see on one side) is for? I wonder what else they have in store.

I think I might have a niggling suspicion why 768MB might be used: Complicated color processing algorithms to keep colors stable through a varying refresh rate.
-- 6-bit FRC during variable refresh rates
-- Color stability during variable refresh rates (60Hz vs 120Hz vs 144Hz requires different calibration)
-- LCD Inversion during variable refresh rates or strobed mode (e.g. www.testufo.com/inversion )
-- Less 3D crosstalk and less strobe-backlight doubleghost effect
-- Overdrive algorithms compatible with variable refresh rates

So the 768MB could be full of LUT's and processing memory, to keep the pixel color values stable during G-SYNC, or during strobe mode. There might be other reasons, but, who knows?

 

[Keysplayr]

I think I might have a niggling suspicion why 768MB might be used: Complicated color processing algorithms to keep colors stable through a varying refresh rate.
-- 6-bit FRC during variable refresh rates
-- Color stability during variable refresh rates (60Hz vs 120Hz vs 144Hz requires different calibration)
-- LCD Inversion during variable refresh rates or strobed mode (e.g. www.testufo.com/inversion )
-- Less 3D crosstalk and less strobe-backlight doubleghost effect
-- Overdrive algorithms compatible with variable refresh rates

So the 768MB could be full of LUT's and processing memory, to keep the pixel color values stable during G-SYNC, or during strobe mode. There might be other reasons, but, who knows?

Excellent. Nice speculation.

 

[SirPauly]

Not all ghosting is crosstalk when dealing with 3D-Vision. Much of the ghosting you see is light bleed through the darkened lenses. They don't black them out completely, and light does get through when there are bright spots on the screen. There is still room to improve the glasses. I think that is the biggest problem at the moment, in regards to ghosting.

Personally looking more-so for innovation with displays -- features like LightBoost and G-Sync to improve quality!

 

[SirPauly]

I find it most interesting that it can give you 30FPS gaming without issues.

Indeed!

 

[SirPauly]

-- Less 3D crosstalk and less strobe-backlight doubleghost effect

Thanks for your speculation -- was curious!

 

[toyota]

SirPauly, you know there is a multi quote function???

I think I might have a niggling suspicion why 768MB might be used: Complicated color processing algorithms to keep colors stable through a varying refresh rate.
-- 6-bit FRC during variable refresh rates
-- Color stability during variable refresh rates (60Hz vs 120Hz vs 144Hz requires different calibration)
-- LCD Inversion during variable refresh rates or strobed mode (e.g. www.testufo.com/inversion )
-- Less 3D crosstalk and less strobe-backlight doubleghost effect
-- Overdrive algorithms compatible with variable refresh rates

So the 768MB could be full of LUT's and processing memory, to keep the pixel color values stable during G-SYNC, or during strobe mode. There might be other reasons, but, who knows?

lol most of that is way over my head.

 

[SirPauly]

Sorry! Will pay attention more in the future.

Really enjoyed the suspicion or speculation from Mark -- great post!

 

[SimianR]

Was I the only one who wasn't dying for a new replacement for or improved version of VSync? If my games are running at 60fps and I have vsync on, I'm usually pretty damn happy. The need to buy a new monitor.. or have a "professional" modder install a chip into your existing monitor doesn't seem like the most practical way to sell a new feature either. Don't get me wrong - at least from what I've read it looks great in person. But I guess as anand wrote - it does seem like a complicated solution to the "problem".

 

[Mark Rejhon]

Was I the only one who wasn't dying for a new replacement for or improved version of VSync? If my games are running at 60fps and I have vsync on, I'm usually pretty damn happy. The need to buy a new monitor.. or have a "professional" modder install a chip into your existing monitor doesn't seem like the most practical way to sell a new feature either. Don't get me wrong - at least from what I've read it looks great in person. But I guess as anand wrote - it does seem like a complicated solution to the "problem".

Some of us are using higher end monitors that has more motion clarity than yours:

For example, with your 60Hz monitors, you have lots more motion blur than I do. You cannot read the text on:
TestUFO Panning Map Test ... While us users of 120hz monitors (with LightBoost enabled) can read the street labels while the map is moving sideways at 960 pixels/second and faster. But maintaining 120fps@120Hz is very hard. So that's where G-SYNC comes in; you can play more complex graphics and get the "60fps@60Hz" feel at all times even at 50fps, 55fps, 60fps, 65fps, 70fps, because of the stutterless technique of G-SYNC. And this goes all the way far beyond 60fps, too. (I can still see microstutters even at 118fps @ 120Hz).

 

[Keysplayr]

Was I the only one who wasn't dying for a new replacement for or improved version of VSync? If my games are running at 60fps and I have vsync on, I'm usually pretty damn happy. The need to buy a new monitor.. or have a "professional" modder install a chip into your existing monitor doesn't seem like the most practical way to sell a new feature either. Don't get me wrong - at least from what I've read it looks great in person. But I guess as anand wrote - it does seem like a complicated solution to the "problem".

Complicated for Nvidia and the monitor makers. Not for us. So why should we care how complicated it is? It does what no other thing has been able to do. Something that presented an annoyance. A problem. Is about to go away.
Tell you what. Give me complicated.

 

[SimianR]

Complicated for Nvidia and the monitor makers. Not for us. So why should we care how complicated it is? It does what no other thing has been able to do. Something that presented an annoyance. A problem. Is about to go away.
Tell you what. Give me complicated.

No, it is complicated for us - its not as if this feature is something you get when you purchase an NVIDIA GPU - you also need to buy a specific monitor with the chip preinstalled (currently not available) or mod your current (specific model) monitor. That to me is the part of the package that isn't all that practical :hmm:

Now don't get me wrong - I'm sure the Asus VG248QE is a popular monitor.. but right now with that being the only monitor they're releasing the kit for, just how many people will this feature even be accessible to? I guess we'll have to see how many monitors are available with it preinstalled next year.

 

[bystander36]

Was I the only one who wasn't dying for a new replacement for or improved version of VSync? If my games are running at 60fps and I have vsync on, I'm usually pretty damn happy. The need to buy a new monitor.. or have a "professional" modder install a chip into your existing monitor doesn't seem like the most practical way to sell a new feature either. Don't get me wrong - at least from what I've read it looks great in person. But I guess as anand wrote - it does seem like a complicated solution to the "problem".

There isn't a better solution if monitors lack the hardware to do a form of Gsync. You can't expect monitors to magically allow functionality they lack.

It will just take a little time before it becomes mainstream, at which point, every monitor may eventually include this tech, as R&D costs are made up and hopefully the actual cost to make is minimal.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

I don't think you understood what I was saying. I have a 120hz monitor. Even if I am not running at a 120FPS, capping at 60FPS still keeps things smooth.

I am not talking about frame interpolation, but rather than having a low monitor refresh rate, having it sync with a higher refresh rate. If I was running at 25FPS, a 25hz refresh rate could cause eye strain, however, a 50hz refresh rate wouldn't. It just wouldn't update the screen with a new frame every refresh.

25Hz on LCD shouldn't cause eyestrain, it doesn't have flicker like a CRT (this is precisely why 60Hz on LCDs are "acceptable" but certainly far from ideal for CRT where most people I know want at least 85Hz for CRT)

the only way doubling (or more) the refresh rate might be good is if we're trying to use low persistence modes (ie Lightboost) along with G-Sync (although what John Carmack was talking about might be better/easier, ie, turning off lightboost when we drop below a certain frame/refresh threshold and going back to high persistence during those times and then switching back to low persistence when frame rates are high enough for it)