Utterly confused with my G-SYNC display

[jorimt]

As for Normal overdrive and ghosting, I'll give you a little tip; 165Hz overdrive is slightly worse on this panel than 144Hz. Downclock and try again. TFT Central tested this on this panel (not model) and found that 165Hz has slightly slower GtG than 144Hz, so I use 144Hz myself, because, while slight, I can notice the difference as well.

In light of the panel numbering difference between the PG279Q and XB271HU and further subjective (by eye) testing of 144Hz vs. 165Hz of my monitor on "Normal" overdrive settings using the stock TestUFO ghosting test, I'm going to have to revise this...

I'm now not so sure; any of my (by eye) testing before this was only ever done with brevity and relative disinterest.

I'd obviously have to have a meter to know for certain, but after switching back and forth dozens of times, and noting the three rows (dark, medium, light rows with cyan backgrounds), it appears 165Hz definitely has less of a trail in the middle row (e.g. mid brightness, and this improvement is seen across the selectable color schemes).

Perhaps the increased GtG in 165Hz mode does only apply to the PG279Q variant, so @speancer, feel free to take that particular part of my comment regarding this monitor with a grain of salt.

Regardless @speancer, if you're sensitive to ghosting, there are certainly TN panels (and a probably a couple of newer IPS panels) that have less ghosting/lower GtG.

FYI, the reason I personally chose an IPS monitor, is I also need it for color-correct work, I'm not super picky about ghosting or overdrive artifacts (~5.1ms is low enough GtG performance for me at 144Hz with my sensitivities and use case), and I can't tolerate the gamma shift (viewing angles) of most TN panels. Your mileage obviously may vary...

[speancer]

How long has it been since you switched from 60Hz to high refresh? Because, as I said, the biggest difference you're going to notice at first is the refresh rate; everything else will get drown out at first. It was that way for me as well.

My time for returning this monitor is almost over, I have 28 days to return products purchased online where I live, so that's about it

When I first made the switch from you're basic office-use 16:10 1080p 60Hz Dell Utrasharp to this monitor, I actually wasn't even finding the refresh rate difference worth it, let alone G-SYNC, and tried a couple of 1440p 60Hz Ultrasharp models before switching back to this one.

In my case, this was because I had mainly been playing 3rd person SP games with a controller, where slow panning and lack of a need for precise aim made the high refresh and G-SYNC less noticeable. But after I started playing more FPS games with a mouse and keyboard, it slowly became evident both were worth it (and definitely noticeable after time) for my use case.

For me the refresh rate was very noticeable from the first moments of using the new display, and I immediately felt a significant difference, not only in FPS games. I actually saw a difference in "Plague Inc: Evolved", all the animations, so fluent, so smooth Even everyday desktop stuff is more pleasing with all that fluidity and smoothness. Of course, it's a shock that lasts for some time, then brain gets used to this goodness and switching back to 60 Hz feels like dying

So let's take a scenario where you're playing a game that doesn't half refresh lock with it's standalone V-SYNC method, and your FPS is within the refresh rate with both G-SYNC and standalone V-SYNC. V-SYNC is typically going to have 1 to 1 1/2 frame higher input lag than G-SYNC in that scenario.

Seems like all games have decent V-SYNC these days, I did not experience any half refresh locks.

At 60Hz, this is an additional 16.6ms to 24.9ms of input lag. However, at 165Hz, it's only an additional 6.1ms to 9.15ms of input lag. If you've just recently made the switch from 60Hz, that level of additional input lag is peanuts (no matter how sensitive you are) compared to what you were dealing with on a 60Hz display. You may ultimately become able to distinguish that input lag difference, or maybe not. Again, this is difficult to talk about because it is all subjective.

Yeah, it just feels so good, even lower frame rates are much, much more playable than on my old 60 Hz IPS display. It surely is sweet! As for the input lag, maybe you're right, thus far I struggled to notice a difference.

Yes, sounds fine to me. Out of curiosity though, have you ever enabled the "Refresh Rate num" option in the monitor OSD? It's a yellow number readout that appears at the top right of the screen, and when G-SYNC is engaged, it will fluctuate with the framerate to signify G-SYNC is functioning.

I have, indeed. It has fluctuated with G-SYNC enabled, matching the frame rate, and stayed at the refresh rate when disabled, obviously. So, yes - G-SYNC was definitely working - and I just couldn't see it do anything

Extreme overdrive is unusable on this monitor, yes. As for Normal overdrive and ghosting, I'll give you a little tip; 165Hz overdrive is slightly worse on this panel than 144Hz. Downclock and try again. TFT Central tested this on this panel (not model) and found that 165Hz has slightly slower GtG than 144Hz, so I use 144Hz myself, because, while slight, I can notice the difference as well.

I don't really see any difference between 165 Hz and 144 Hz when it comes to ghosting. Seems pretty much the same to me.

Regarding trails, for one, FYI, this is still about the best 144Hz 1440p IPS panel you're going to get where GtG levels are concerned (there is a Viewsonic IPS model that recently released that has slightly faster GtG, but it has other issues).

Well, Acer Predator XB271HU is already a pretty old display, latest nanoIPS panels - like LG 27GL850 - seem to have superior reaction times and motion handling, as well as very low input lag. This particular LG model is praised for its response times and very little processing lag as for an IPS panel. I am interested in testing it, and I probably will.

If you're not opposed to 1080p and want to stick with IPS, I'd recommend something like the ViewSonic
XG270, or a TN panel for faster GtG performance with less ghosting/overdrive artifacts. That, and 240Hz is even better for comp twitch shooters. And yes, if you don't notice a difference with G-SYNC at 165Hz, you'll notice it even less at 240Hz, so maybe you're better off with a 240Hz TN (with or without G-SYNC) at this point if you can tolerate sub 1440p.

And here we reach my main problem. I guess I am opposed to 1080p, and to anything smaller than 27 inches, and less than 1440p... and probably even to TN panels. I've used 27" 2560x1440 IPS for YEARS. I ordered BenQ Zowie XL2546 and I actually expect an unpleasant shock, as it's just 24.5" 1080p TN panel, but I just want to experience such a display firsthand. Other than that, I have two more monitors on my "to test" list: already mentioned LG 27GL850 (27" 1440 nanoIPS, Free-Sync/G-SYNC Compatible) and HP Omen X 27. The latter is actually 27" 1440p TN panel with 240 Hz refresh rate, reasonably priced, so it basically looks like the ultimate choice here - putting good size, high resolution and responsiveness together - especially that it's praised for extremely good response times and extremely low input lag. It supports both Free-Sync and G-SYNC Compatible, that's always good, in case I start to appreciate what G-SYNC does over time What do you think about these displays? Here's the review of Omen X 27:

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/hp/omen-x-27

Regardless @speancer, if you're sensitive to ghosting, there are certainly TN panels (and a probably a couple of newer IPS panels) that have less ghosting/lower GtG.

FYI, the reason I personally chose an IPS monitor, is I also need it for color-correct work, I'm not super picky about ghosting or overdrive artifacts (~5.1ms is low enough GtG performance for me at 144Hz with my sensitivities and use case), and I can't tolerate the gamma shift (viewing angles) of most TN panels. Your mileage obviously may vary...

Yeah, I'd really like to have a display that would be less blurry and show less ghosting, TN panel would probably be the best for this, but I share the same concern with you - don't know if I'll be able to stand TN overall image quality - although I've heard TN panels actually got better in color reproduction. Omen X 27 I mentioned supposedly has a nice image quality as for a Twisted Nematic panel.

And from my last G-SYNC testing I can tell you this - I think I noticed a little bit of jittery feeling just moving my mouse around in "DOOM Eternal" while using V-SYNC. I picked one specific place in game for this. With G-SYNC I am almost sure that jittery feeling was not present. I guess this would be V-SYNC microstuttering? However, during normal gameplay, I don't think I'd notice this, and seems like I don't. I am also tired of testing this already

[jorimt]

My time for returning this monitor is almost over, I have 28 days to return products purchased online where I live, so that's about it

Ah.

Of course, it's a shock that lasts for some time, then brain gets used to this goodness and switching back to 60 Hz feels like dying

Yeah, once you get used to high refresh, 60Hz feels like the difference between 60Hz and 30Hz when you're used to 60.

Seems like all games have decent V-SYNC these days, I did not experience any half refresh locks.

If you're playing at 165Hz, half refresh would be around 80 (so not as extreme as 60 to 30 with 60Hz), but it does seem a lot of modern games handle double buffer differently where half refresh lock is concerned.

Yeah, it just feels so good, even lower frame rates are much, much more playable than on my old 60 Hz IPS display. It surely is sweet! As for the input lag, maybe you're right, thus far I struggled to notice a difference.

Yeah, again, you kind of have to acclimate to whole high refresh aspect before you begin to notice the rest. At least it was that way for me. That, and it can be difficult to tell a single frame of input lag differences in some circumstances at higher refresh rates.

I have, indeed. It has fluctuated with G-SYNC enabled, matching the frame rate, and stayed at the refresh rate when disabled, obviously. So, yes - G-SYNC was definitely working - and I just couldn't see it do anything

Noted.

Well, Acer Predator XB271HU is already a pretty old display, latest nanoIPS panels - like LG 27GL850 - seem to have superior reaction times and motion handling, as well as very low input lag. This particular LG model is praised for its response times and very little processing lag as for an IPS panel. I am interested in testing it, and I probably will.

I was referring to 1440p IPS G-SYNC displays with modules. But yes, there are newer 1440p IPS models that may have superior GtG, but they are G-SYNC Compatible, which is driver-side G-SYNC (not hardware).

And here we reach my main problem. I guess I am opposed to 1080p, and to anything smaller than 27 inches, and less than 1440p... and probably even to TN panels. I've used 27" 2560x1440 IPS for YEARS. I ordered BenQ Zowie XL2546 and I actually expect an unpleasant shock, as it's just 24.5" 1080p TN panel, but I just want to experience such a display firsthand. Other than that, I have two more monitors on my "to test" list: already mentioned LG 27GL850 (27" 1440 nanoIPS, Free-Sync/G-SYNC Compatible) and HP Omen X 27. The latter is actually 27" 1440p TN panel with 240 Hz refresh rate, reasonably priced, so it basically looks like the ultimate choice here - putting good size, high resolution and responsiveness together - especially that it's praised for extremely good response times and extremely low input lag. It supports both Free-Sync and G-SYNC Compatible, that's always good, in case I start to appreciate what G-SYNC does over time What do you think about these displays? Here's the review of Omen X 27:

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/hp/omen-x-27

The Omen X 27 seems like a good choice for your specific requirements (even the best 1440p IPS panels may still be too slow GtG-wise for you).

From my last G-SYNC testing I can tell you this - I think I noticed a little bit of jittery feeling just moving my mouse around in "DOOM Eternal" while using V-SYNC. I picked one specific place in game for this. With G-SYNC I am almost sure that jittery feeling was not present. I guess this would be V-SYNC microstuttering? However, during normal gameplay, I don't think I'd notice this, and seems like I don't. I am also tired of testing this already

Yes, that would be V-SYNC causing a frame to repeat roughly every second with FPS inside the refresh rate (G-SYNC doesn't do this).

A simulation of this phenomena can be viewed here:
https://www.testufo.com/gsync#framerate ... &compare=1

[speancer]

Seems like all games have decent V-SYNC these days, I did not experience any half refresh locks.

If you're playing at 165Hz, half refresh would be around 80 (so not as extreme as 60 to 30 with 60Hz), but it does seem a lot of modern games handle double buffer differently where half refresh lock is concerned.

I know, but frames seem to fluctuate without any problems. I have variable frames like 45-60, 60-80, 80-120, and there are no frame locks. Turns out standard in-game V-SYNC handles variable frames just fine.

I was referring to 1440p IPS G-SYNC displays with modules. But yes, there are newer 1440p IPS models that may have superior GtG, but they are G-SYNC Compatible, which is driver-side G-SYNC (not hardware).

I know G-SYNC Compatible it driver-based. I don't think monitors with G-SYNC modules are worth it. Good thing is that Nvidia came up with G-SYNC Compatible, probably only because of raising competition from Free-Sync displays, which are cheaper and much more common. I would not base my purchase decision on G-SYNC module now anymore, but I'd also not buy a monitor that is not G-SYNC Compatible. It's always better to have Adaptive-Sync, so I'd use it once I upgraded my GPU, it's more future proof.

The Omen X 27 seems like a good choice for your specific requirements (even the best 1440p IPS panels may still be too slow GtG-wise for you).

That's actually the only display in reasonable price that has it all... except panel type. Don't know if I can stand TN. We'll see.

Just to make sure, I think you might have missed a bit of my previous post, I was editing it while the time you were probably already writing a reply. Would you mind taking a second look? Thank you for your time and replies so far

[speancer]

Mouse microstutter weak link
Are you using 1000Hz mouse at high-dpi setting such as 1600dpi or higher? Modern sensor accurate at high DPI? High resolution mouse pad? Clean mouse feet? Mouseturns exactly as smooth as keyboard strafe left/right? Try testing some mouse slowturns and if they're steppy, increase mouse DPI and lower in-game sensitivity, until mouse slowturns is silky TestUFO-smooth. By eliminating the mouse microstutter weak link, we can more analyze other stutter sources.

I don't think mouse microstutter was or is any problem. My mouse is indeed high-end with flawless sensor (PMW3366), but I always use 400 DPI for gaming. The only jittery feeling I've had during recent testing was gone after enabling G-SYNC, so turns out it was V-SYNC microstutter, although I do not notice that during normal gameplay.

Human vision differences, and eye-tracking habits
Stutter visibility can change depending on whether your eyes are tracking the motion or not. Different people have different stutter sensitivities. For some, stutter is only visible at low frame rates, some people have a reduced motion sensitivity or is partially motion blind (Akinetopsia), or you might just not see it nearly as much as motion blur. It is said that 12% of the human population is color blind.
Also, try viewing some stutter simulation demos high-Hz stutter versus no microstutter.

Yep, I'm pretty sure I can distinguish the two: one is a little jittery, the other one perfectly smooth.

[jorimt]

I know, but frames seem to fluctuate without any problems. I have variable frames like 45-60, 60-80, 80-120, and there are no frame locks. Turns out standard in-game V-SYNC handles variable frames just fine.

Again, standard V-SYNC is much less of an issue at higher-than-60Hz, but for those sensitive to the additional stutter and input lag (I have come to the point that I can tell without issue, even when I don't know G-SYNC isn't engaged, happened to me when playing Control most recently; got stuck in borderless and I only had G-SYNC enabled for fullscreen, and I was thinking why does it look/feel like this?), G-SYNC is ultimately worth it. But again, subjective.

I know G-SYNC Compatible it driver-based. I don't think monitors with G-SYNC modules are worth it. Good thing is that Nvidia came up with G-SYNC Compatible, probably only because of raising competition from Free-Sync displays, which are cheaper and much more common. I would not base my purchase decision on G-SYNC module now anymore, but I'd also not buy a monitor that is not G-SYNC Compatible. It's always better to have Adaptive-Sync, so I'd use it once I upgraded my GPU, it's more future proof.

For all intents and purposes, an officially G-SYNC compatible monitor is fully comparable to a G-SYNC w/module, and the general experience should be the same with G-SYNC + V-SYNC. However, there are a couple of differences that can make the hardware module worth it for some (including me):

1. G-SYNC w/module has dynamic overdrive, 99% of G-SYNC Compatible displays do not. This reduces ghosting with variable framerates during G-SYNC operation.
2. G-SYNC has a dedicated module, G-SYNC Compatible does not. This means G-SYNC Compatible displays are potentially a little "looser" with frametime performance, causing more tearing with G-SYNC on + V-SYNC off, and require a lower FPS limit within the G-SYNC range to reduce it. However, since G-SYNC + V-SYNC fixes this for both hardware and software G-SYNC, it's a bit of a moot point, and they should, again, be comparable when properly configured. But it does mean that the "V-SYNC" component of G-SYNC probably has to compensate for frametime variances more with G-SYNC Compatible than it does with G-SYNC w/module.

That said, for your use-case, the above differences are probably negligible, and G-SYNC Compatible will be more than sufficient (if you even end up using it).

Just to make sure, I think you might have missed a bit of my previous post, I was editing it while the time you were probably already writing a reply. Would you mind taking a second look? Thank you for your time and replies so far

Do you mean this part? If so, yes, it wasn't there when I replied:

Yeah, I'd really like to have a display that would be less blurry and show less ghosting, TN panel would probably be the best for this, but I share the same concern with you - don't know if I'll be able to stand TN overall image quality - although I've heard TN panels actually got better in color reproduction. Omen X 27 I mentioned supposedly has a nice image quality as for a Twisted Nematic panel.

The upside, is while it's TN, it appears to be a true 8 bit panel instead of a 6 bit + FRC panel. This can make a big difference on a TN. Gamma shift will still be there, but you may find it tolerable. Gamma shift, FYI, is when the bottom or top of the screen looks more washed out/color distorted than the other, even when viewing the panel straight on. Some TN panels are worse than others in this respect, but I hear some of the more modern panels are better.

As for the Omen X 27 itself, looks like a potential pick for your use case, but feel free to keep looking until you feel sure. If you're not limited to a G-SYNC monitor w/module (which you aren't), there are a lot to choose from.