Is G-sync pointless?

[Gauzl]

I really want to upgrade my 120hz 1080p TN to a 1440p IPS and will need something like V-sync as I will be getting over 60fps on most games at 1440p and being IPS it will be 60hz however I can't stand playing first person shooters with the input lag from V-sync. I got really excited when I heard about G-sync but now apparently something called adaptive/free-sync is coming out as well that does the exact same thing but for free and will be implemented into the next version of display port, is all this true and G-sync is completely obsolete?

[Hirad123]

I'm pretty sure there are some differences in how adaptive sync and g sync work if I understand correctly. But for the most part, yeah I'm pretty sure you'll be fine with adaptive sync. I don't really know much about it though so don't take my word for it.

[Rorgash]

G-Sync had to be made for other companies to get their shit together, so nvidia should be praised for creating G-sync, they are the reason we are getting free sync or what its called now.

[Akolyte]

G-sync is not supposed to be pointless but it is pointless until there are (decent) G-sync monitors released.  So if your willing to wait and hope then it is not useless.  

 

G-sync is Nvidia's solution to lag, it is a custom module built into monitors allowing the frame rate to sync like v-sync but without the lag.  FreeSync is AMD's solution, any AMD r9/r7 graphics card (right now limited to r9 290x and r7 260x) will be compatible with it, Free-sync is free, and free-sync is available on any monitor with display port 1.2 I think.  

 

So if you have AMD r9 I would say getting a monitor that is compatible (display port 1.2) it is worth it, but if you have an Nvidia card I would say either wait for a decent G-sync monitor or just get a good monitor without it. 

[Unhelpful]

G-Sync had to be made for other companies to get their shit together, so nvidia should be praised for creating G-sync, they are the reason we are getting free sync or what its called now.

@Gauzl Rorgash is exactly right. They were the first to make a solution like this so well known.

I personally don't give two craps about who has the long-lasting solution that we all use, just so long as it happens.

[Manny Calavera]

G-Sync had to be made for other companies to get their shit together, so nvidia should be praised for creating G-sync, they are the reason we are getting free sync or what its called now.

There are some people ( i wont mention who ), who think that gsync or freesync is coded in cuple of months and say that a company that made G-sync was reason why AMD made freesync and demo it on laptop.

I would suggest to those people, whoever they are, that they get their shit togheter and stop being fanboys.

 

Ontopic, its pretty simple, if you get nvidia, you get gsync module monitor, if not you have to wait for display port.

[Unhelpful]

There are some people ( i wont mention who ), who think that gsync or freesync is coded in cuple of months and say that a company that made G-sync was reason why AMD made freesync and demo it on laptop.

I would suggest to those people, whoever they are, that they get their shit togheter and stop being fanboys.

 

Ontopic, its pretty simple, if you get nvidia, you get gsync module monitor, if not you have to wait for display port.

If you are referring to me I don't think it was made in a couple months, they were both obviously working on each solution for quite some time.

 

I was saying that nvidia made the solution publicly well-known.

[eshbop]

Nvidia would be crazy not to make use of DP Adaptive sync in forthcoming Geforce cards and assuming A-sync and G-sync perform the same, G-sync becomes redundant.

 

But I'm half expecting G-sync to be better in some way than any A-sync solution, just because Nvidia spent time engineering their own hardware for it. We'll see.