g-sync verdict, it suck

[pat182]

got a pg278q for now 4months , I don't get it with g sync, I'm running sli since forever , sli 670/sli 980 and now sli 980ti. maybe I'm lucky but tearing has never been a big issue with gaming. I mainly use ULMB mode on the monitor because with g sync, games look like crap when fps womble . Ex: rise of tomb raider , depends on we're you are fps gonna go from 144 to 60, yea OK g sync remove tearing and ajust refresh rate but it feels so not smooth/crazy stutter when fps bounce around vs if I just leave fix 120hz ulmb. maybe if you re single gpu and between 30 and 60 fps its worth, but then why buy a 144hz ? I do prefer 120hz lock even if fps goes under 80fps, looks better to me

[Majestic]

No u

[Samfisher]

So you're saying it sucks cos you have no need for it.... It's like saying a Ferrari 430 Spyder sucks cos you have an Enzo. Logic....

[chicksoup]

16 minutes ago, Samfisher said:

So you're saying it sucks cos you have no need for it.... It's like saying a Ferrari 430 Spyder sucks cos you have an Enzo. Logic....

thats a good comparison, because gsync is intended for lower fps looking better and not really improve something that already works

[pat182]

2 hours ago, Samfisher said:

So you're saying it sucks cos you have no need for it.... It's like saying a Ferrari 430 Spyder sucks cos you have an Enzo. Logic....

well I did buy g sync thinking it would be mind blowing, but I was disappointed . didn't even know what ulmb was before buying this lol. and people who buys this monitor normaly have the horse power too put 120fps . so that's why I think g sync is a useless feature unless maybe you have a only 60hz gsync wich I could agree could help gaming experience, but if you gonna buy a 144hz monitor to play at 30-60fps, that's waste of money. 

 

if a game run at 75-90fps , I would rather use ULMB at 85hz or 100hz, if you run games at lower than that, why buy a 144hz then??  I only kept the monitor for ulmb rlly, never gonna use gsync since theres no real benefit irl 

[Samfisher]

21 minutes ago, pat182 said:

well I did buy g sync thinking it would be mind blowing, but I was disappointed . didn't even know what ulmb was before buying this lol. and people who buys this monitor normaly have the horse power too put 120fps . so that's why I think g sync is a useless feature unless maybe you have a only 60hz gsync wich I could agree could help gaming experience, but if you gonna buy a 144hz monitor to play at 30-60fps, that's waste of money. 

 

if a game run at 75-90fps , I would rather use ULMB at 85hz or 100hz, if you run games at lower than that, why buy a 144hz then??  I only kept the monitor for ulmb rlly, never gonna use gsync since theres no real benefit irl 

That is only true if you only play ONE game.  I obviously play more than 1 game, and only care for high refresh rates in FPS games.  Other games like Witcher 3, G-Sync allows me to crank up everything and maintain a smooth gaming experience.

[Spartancloud]

2 hours ago, Samfisher said:

That is only true if you only play ONE game.  I obviously play more than 1 game, and only care for high refresh rates in FPS games.  Other games like Witcher 3, G-Sync allows me to crank up everything and maintain a smooth gaming experience.

That's why I like it on my monitor, some games I really don't need it and I opt for ULMB instead, others I like to run at max settings and dip into lower frame rates, that's when I'm glad to have G-Sync. Some people will still prefer tearing though, personally I hate it but that's just me.

[foamygopher]

On February 15, 2016 at 0:45 PM, Samfisher said:

That is only true if you only play ONE game.  I obviously play more than 1 game, and only care for high refresh rates in FPS games.  Other games like Witcher 3, G-Sync allows me to crank up everything and maintain a smooth gaming experience.

This! Especially at higher resolutions 1440/4K.