Gsync does not work for me

[kalston]

Videos aren't going to show anything except maybe the framerate fluctuations if there is an OSD displaying it. I think you're misunderstanding g-sync completely and also are not very sensitive to input lag at all because in the 60hz range it's atrocious. And what refresh rate are you running your display at for those last tests? 60hz? You will probably easily hit 60fps and thus g-sync will effectively be the same as v-sync - same input lag and smoothness. With a g-sync monitor, always set the nvcp setting to "prefer highest refresh rate" so that you rarely (if ever) run into g-sync's cap and get the best possible experience.

And I do hope you're not using SLI or a bi-GPU card. I also hope you didn't forget that nvcp has 2 tabs with g-sync settings, and when enabled it overrides v-sync completely.

I strongly suggest that you install a free game such as Quake Live and play around with the built in fps cap and different settings in NVCP. That will enlighten you and help you understand g-sync and v-sync.

[Glide]

You can't show the effects of G-Sync in a video.
A video has a fixed framerate, just like a standard monitor has a fixed refresh rate.
You can only see the elimination of judder when running games on a G-Sync display.

And you seem to be having some serious framerate problems there.
G-Sync isn't magic. At you approach 30 FPS, the framerate is simply too low for the speed of motion being depicted. The only way to hide that is to use significant amounts of motion blur.

G-Sync is more about displaying unlocked framerates above ~50 FPS without judder, than making <40 FPS playable in my opinion.

I do think you need to switch to Afterburner for anything that you're recording so that CPU and GPU load stats are visible, rather than just framerate. Framerate on its own is not enough information.

[Joolsyz]

Youtube vids never look smooth to me.

[Lanarchy]

kalston: I selected 60hz refresh rate on my PG278Q with the button on the back (60/120/144) to make sure. I know about the "prefer highest refresh rate" option in nvcp, I use it for games and keep desktop to 120hz to minimize the chances I'll get the "Out of Range" error so many people had/have with this monitor. Running desktop at 120 apparently helps. And before someone mentions it, yes I switched to 60hz after launching Borderlands, and no I'm not Windowed. I'm using Fullscreen, always.

No I'm not on SLI, never used SLI in fact. I normally run a GTX 980 but since I'm stepping that one up to GTX 980 Ti, I borrowed a friend's GTX 660. So, not sure about bi-GPU but can you explain how that would have an impact on Vsync/Gsync ?

I strongly suggest that you install a free game such as Quake Live and play around with the built in fps cap and different settings in NVCP. That will enlighten you and help you understand g-sync and v-sync.

What if I've done that with 50+ other games ? It has to be Quake Live ?

Glide: I have serious framerate problems on these because I borrowed a 660 while my 980 is being stepped up. And to be sure I was always in the 30-60 range (*apparently* Gsync's sweet spot, isn't it ?) I forced all graphic options to their maximum, and remember my monitor's resolution is 1440p. But the experience was the same with the 980. After reading and watching so many reviews and features on Gsync, saying you really notice it in the 30 to 60 range, I was excited to finally be able to see its magic on the 660, but nope. Not even.

I find it funny that on page 1, someone said

While it certainly sounds like you have properly enabled v-sync, the fact that you are seeing framerates in the 40's and 50's is proof that V-sync is not active. With v-sync working on a monitor with fixed refresh of 60 Hz, you will only ever see framerates of 60, 30, 20, 15, etc. That's fundamental to how v-sync works

and now you say

G-Sync is more about displaying unlocked framerates above ~50 FPS without judder

.
So, which is it ? That other guy says it is IMPOSSIBLE to get framerates in the 40s and 50s. I have clearly demonstrated I do.

[Haste]

Tip: What you should be looking at is the frame times not the fps.

Getting about 40 or 50 frames per second doesn't disprove that it was a fluctuation of 33.3ms(30fps) and 16.6ms(60fps) during that second.

[Lanarchy]

I can do Fraps Benchmark Viewer frametimes tests later tonight and post them here, but I don't think when people say "Oh I could never go back to a non-Gsync monitor" they mean frametimes on a diagram. So, that guy on page 1 says it's impossible, you say it is but it's actually frametimes that are different. I swear if I hadn't seen so much praise for Gsync all around, I'd believe 100% I got scammed. Things are changing by the page.

[Haste]

I can do Fraps Benchmark Viewer frametimes tests later tonight and post them here, but I don't think when people say "Oh I could never go back to a non-Gsync monitor" they mean frametimes on a diagram. So, that guy on page 1 says it's impossible, you say it is but it's actually frametimes that are different. I swear if I hadn't seen so much praise for Gsync all around, I'd believe 100% I got scammed. Things are changing by the page.

I can easily notice G-sync vs V-sync. The micro-stutter induced by V-sync is obvious to me. But everyone has a different sensitivity,

That said, the marketing and hype about G-sync has been over-claiming massively.

People claimed that it made low frame rates feel like high frame rates (which has absolutely no ground and is basically BS)

People claimed that it made frame drops unnoticeable (again BS)

People claimed that it masks stuttering (BS once more)

Thanks to the great info on this site, I knew exactly what to expect from G-sync and it gave me exactly what I expected.
So no disappointment on my hand.

[Glide]

Glide: I have serious framerate problems on these because I borrowed a 660 while my 980 is being stepped up. And to be sure I was always in the 30-60 range (*apparently* Gsync's sweet spot, isn't it ?)

That's personal preference. I'd say that the ideal G-Sync range is 50-144 FPS, not 30-60.
Low framerates have inherent limitations for how fast motion can be, and if you're not using motion blur, those limitations show up far sooner.

I would still be targeting a minimum of 60 FPS - just like I do already. The point is that when the framerate dips below 60 FPS for a brief moment, it doesn't kill the experience by introducing horrible judder.

There are some games where, no matter what settings I change, unless I drop the resolution, the game is going to dip below 60 FPS at some point. It may only drop to the 55-60 FPS range, but that still judders horribly with triple-buffering, or tears with Adaptive V-Sync.

After reading and watching so many reviews and features on Gsync, saying you really notice it in the 30 to 60 range, I was excited to finally be able to see its magic on the 660, but nope. Not even.

Well there are millions of people that are perfectly happy with 30 FPS console gaming too.

I find it funny that on page 1, someone said

While it certainly sounds like you have properly enabled v-sync, the fact that you are seeing framerates in the 40's and 50's is proof that V-sync is not active. With v-sync working on a monitor with fixed refresh of 60 Hz, you will only ever see framerates of 60, 30, 20, 15, etc. That's fundamental to how v-sync works

and now you say

G-Sync is more about displaying unlocked framerates above ~50 FPS without judder

.
So, which is it ? That other guy says it is IMPOSSIBLE to get framerates in the 40s and 50s. I have clearly demonstrated I do.

It does seem to be less rigid now in most games than the hard flip between 60/30 that it used to be.
And more games seem to be using triple-buffering now when you enable the "v-sync" option.
I've just never noticed that until now because as soon as NVIDIA introduced Adaptive V-Sync (around 2011?) I started using that everywhere.
I still target 60 FPS, because I hate screen tearing almost as much as the judder and latency from triple-buffering or 60 fps dropping to 30, but I prefer the behavior with Adaptive V-Sync to the alternatives.

The judder, latency and tearing is the reason that v-sync or triple-buffering is bad.
The fact that v-sync would drop from 60 to 30 only made it more obvious, but that doesn't make dropping to anything below 60 FPS any less bad.
Even something like 58 FPS will stutter badly on a standard 60Hz monitor, while a game dropping from 60 FPS to 58 FPS should be imperceptible on a G-Sync display. It should look just as smooth as if it were a constant 60. And in the less demanding scenes, you're no longer capped at 60 FPS.

It relaxes the strict "never drop below 60" policy that you have to adopt in order to have smooth gameplay.
It doesn't throw it out the window and make 30 FPS a good experience. (unless you were already happy playing at low framerates)
Sure, low 30's to 40's are better on a G-Sync display, but still not that good.

I can do Fraps Benchmark Viewer frametimes tests later tonight and post them here, but I don't think when people say "Oh I could never go back to a non-Gsync monitor" they mean frametimes on a diagram. So, that guy on page 1 says it's impossible, you say it is but it's actually frametimes that are different. I swear if I hadn't seen so much praise for Gsync all around, I'd believe 100% I got scammed. Things are changing by the page.

When people have just spent almost $1000 on a monitor, it's no surprise that they're hyping it up as this amazing thing.
It's really good, and a big improvement over V-Sync, but it doesn't magically make low framerates look like high framerates - unless you were never sensitive to framerates before anyway, and it was only the judder that you noticed.

Personally, there still isn't a G-Sync display that I feel is worth the cost yet.
I've spent time with them and it's great, but I'm not ready to spend that much to replace my current displays.
I'd be more inclined on waiting for Adaptive-Sync to appear in televisions than spending almost $1000 on a monitor.
Or if NEC/Eizo released a high-end graphics monitor that also supports high framerates for gaming, I'd buy that immediately.
But right now we're seeing "gaming-class" displays at graphics monitor prices - without the strict image quality, and quality control that you would expect from a graphics monitor.

[Lanarchy]

Well, I don't understand why but I installed GTA V today and ever since I did, now games do drop to a fixed fps. GTA on 144hz dropped to 72, or 36. On 120, it dropped to 60, or 40. On 60, it dropped to 30. I then tried Borderlands 2 again and now I could see it. Same as GTA but with a 48 mixed in somewhere. I think 144/72/48/36. With Gsync, it did not drop to any of those. Again, same with World of Warcraft, same numbers. Though Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor didn't seem to be affected. It showed 33, 34, 51, etc... and sustained. So, I don't know with that one.

But that has convinced me. I don't know why suddenly after installing GTA, Vsync started behaving normally but I'm happy now. Thanks for your help guys.

[Fonzie]

I've not had the fps dropping issue, but gsync is never smooth regardless of framerates for me and has only happened recently.