g sync module monitor LFC or none ?

[Anonymous893125]

bit confused if the monitors with g sync module (the expensive ones) have lfc or not ?(low frame compensation), like g sync compatible monitors have ? because it shows here on some of them at the top (1-244hz 1-144hz), so does that mean if they have an adaptive range of 1-144hz or whatever does that mean it wont need to use lfc then ? https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/pr ... s/,because i understand how LFC works on my now g sync compatible freesync monitor (48-144hz),if for example im playing a game at 30 fps the 30 fps is too low for my monitors minimum adaptive refresh range (48) so in this scenario it would 2X it as to get passed the (48) min so 60 would be the final g sync hz readout ,so my question is for the monitors that are (1-144hz) im taking that as they must not need to use LFC as theyre Variable Refresh Rate Range is so low (1) ?
thanks

[Chief Blur Buster]

bit confused if the monitors with g sync module (the expensive ones) have lfc or not ?(low frame compensation), like g sync compatible monitors have ? because it shows here on some of them at the top (1-244hz 1-144hz), so does that mean if they have an adaptive range of 1-144hz or whatever does that mean it wont need to use lfc then ? https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/pr ... s/,because i understand how LFC works on my now g sync compatible freesync monitor (48-144hz),if for example im playing a game at 30 fps the 30 fps is too low for my monitors minimum adaptive refresh range (48) so in this scenario it would 2X it as to get passed the (48) min so 60 would be the final g sync hz readout ,so my question is for the monitors that are (1-144hz) im taking that as they must not need to use LFC as theyre Variable Refresh Rate Range is so low (1) ?
thanks

It's low because it's LFC built into the G-SYNC module.

Usually the true min-Hz is roughly 30Hz, but it can be somewhere higher/lower, a various form of LFC is doing the range extension all the way down to 1 Hz. What this means is that the video cable can send 1 Hz to the monitor, and the monitor will automatically repeat-refresh until a new refresh cycle is delivered over the cable.

On G-SYNC native, the "LFC" logic (NVIDIA does not call it that directly) is already built into the chip, so LFC is monitor-side. While the
video cable can transmit as low as 1 Hz, the panel itself may still be 30 Hz or 48 Hz, because the G-SYNC native chip does the automatic repeat-refreshing as necessary.

On generic/industry standard VRR (HDMI, VESA, AMD, FreeSync) the LFC is done software based by the graphics driver, so LFC is computer-side, making sure the cable is not transmitting less than 48 Hz to the monitor. The monitor does not need to be directly designed to support less than 48 Hz.

Personally, I don't always like low Hz LFC every single time. I usually like a higher LFC threshold such as 65 Hz, because it has better quality overdrive. My experience is that "24 Hz" via 72 Hz looks better than "24 Hz" via 24 Hz or 48 Hz, because triple-refreshing a 24fps frame using 72Hz looks better. Although there is not less motion blur, there's less flicker effects. This is because there is less LCD GtG decay (less VRR flicker effect), and less inversion artifact (the chessboard texture in solid colors don't behave "slow").

That being said, if you had to do low-Hz LFC, the G-SYNC native LFC implementation is the best LFC implementation, better than most software-based LFC implementations.

[Anonymous893125]

ok , can in game vsync be used for the low lag v sync on method ?

[Chief Blur Buster]

ok , can in game vsync be used for the low lag v sync on method ?

Do you have a reason you can't use VRR as the low-lag VSYNC method?
Such as needing strobing features or disabling VRR to avoiding LFC problems (e.g. overdrive artifacts)?

For most situations, capped VRR is even superior to low-lag VSYNC.

VRR is generally the world's lowest-lag "non-VSYNC-OFF" sync technology.