GTX 1070 or Radeon r580 8gb with freesync monitor?

[Shastarocks]

I am wanting to build a pc and was wondering if I should get a GeForce GTX 1070 or Radeon r580 8Gb with a freesync monitor. I don't want screen tearing and I am on a budget. What one is the best. If there is another amd card that is better under 450$ let me know.  I am determined on this monitor Samsung CFG70 Series 27-Inch. Mainly the 2 HDMI inputs one for my future PC and my current XBox.

[Techicolors]

you can't use freesync with a NVIDIA card. so 580 it is 

 

Vega 56 is another option, but prices aren't good right now. plus i'd wait for AIB cards, unless you're willing to either undervolt or watercool 

 

edit: a fury (x) is another 

[Shastarocks]

Just now, Technicolors said:

you can't use freesync with a NVIDIA card. so 580 it is 

 

Vega 56 is another option, but prices aren't good right now. plus i'd wait for AIB cards, unless you're willing to either undervolt or watercool 

 

edit: a fury (x) is another 

Well it would not be until the spring of 2018 till I can even start building one, i am going to get a job after Christmas so I don't have to ask off for thanksgiving and Christmas right away.

[Brooksie359]

don't get screen-tearing if you use vsync 

[Brooksie359]

Just now, Shastarocks said:

Well it would not be until the spring of 2018 till I can even start building one, i am going to get a job after Christmas so I don't have to ask off for thanksgiving and Christmas right away.

well then no reason to even talk about what gpu to get now. the gpu market will likely be very different by then. 

[DocSwag]

1 minute ago, Shastarocks said:

Well it would not be until the spring of 2018 till I can even start building one, i am going to get a job after Christmas so I don't have to ask off for thanksgiving and Christmas right away.

If you can't even build until half a year from now there is no point in asking now... Market is going to change by then so asking now is pointless.

1 minute ago, Brooksie359 said:

don't get screen-tearing if you use vsync 

Yeah, but you get input lag and stuttering.

[Brooksie359]

Just now, DocSwag said:

If you can't even build until half a year from now there is no point in asking now... Market is going to change by then so asking now is pointless.

Yeah, but you get input lag and stuttering.

I don't really care about input lag and i have never experienced stuttering with vsync. Also the whole input lag argument is quite irrelevant because alot of that input lag is due to fixing your fps so if you cant push more than 60 fps anyways you really wont see a big difference. if you can push alot more than 60 fps then you can just use fastsync.  

[DocSwag]

Just now, Brooksie359 said:

I don't really care about input lag and i have never experienced stuttering with vsync. Also the whole input lag argument is quite irrelevant because alot of that input lag is due to fixing your fps so if you cant push more than 60 fps anyways you really wont see a big difference. if you can push alot more than 60 fps then you can just use fastsync.  

I have experienced stutter with it. It's not horribly annoying but it definitely is noticeable.

 

I suggest you check out this video, there is definitely an input lag difference, even between nothing and fast sync.

 

[Brooksie359]

Just now, DocSwag said:

I have experienced stutter with it. It's not horribly annoying but it definitely is noticeable.

 

I suggest you check out this video, there is definitely an input lag difference, even between nothing and fast sync.

 

already seen the video, but again the difference is so small and mostly due to when the frames are rendered more than anything else. also the same applies to freesync so this argument is quite irrelevant. the thing that many fail to realize is the input lag is almost entirely due to when the gpu renders the frame that gets displayed by the monitor. so that decrease you see in input lag that you see when comparing fastsync and nothing is almost entirely due to screen tearing so unless you prefer screen tearing just to see half a frame faster I would use fastsync. 

[DocSwag]

10 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

already seen the video, but again the difference is so small and mostly due to when the frames are rendered more than anything else. also the same applies to freesync so this argument is quite irrelevant. the thing that many fail to realize is the input lag is almost entirely due to when the gpu renders the frame that gets displayed by the monitor. so that decrease you see in input lag that you see when comparing fastsync and nothing is almost entirely due to screen tearing so unless you prefer screen tearing just to see half a frame faster I would use fastsync. 

Small? With fastsync it's like 15% and with v sync it's double...

 

Not saying fast sync is horrible or anything. It's pretty good. But it's not as good as freesync or g sync due to its inherent limitations. With freesync and g sync your monitor refreshes when the frame is displayed. With fast sync you display the frame and you don't see it until your monitor refreshes.

 

EDIT: It's worth noting that these test were done above 60 fps (where fast sync works the best) whereas iirc the monitor refresh rate was 60 hz

[Brooksie359]

Just now, DocSwag said:

Small? With fastsync it's like 15% and with v sync it's double...

 

Not saying fast sync is horrible or anything. It's pretty good. But it's not as good as freesync or g sync due to its inherent limitations. With freesync and g sync your monitor refreshes when the frame is displayed. With fast sync you display the frame and you don't see it until your monitor refreshes.

lol that's not how it works. cant use gsync when your fps is higher than your refreshrate. and again that 15% is entirely due to the screen displaying torn screens so unless you care so much about that small amount that you want to display torn images i would say it is the best way to limit input lag while still having a playable experience. 

[DocSwag]

Just now, Brooksie359 said:

lol that's not how it works. cant use gsync when your fps is higher than your refreshrate. and again that 15% is entirely due to the screen displaying torn screens so unless you care so much about that small amount that you want to display torn images i would say it is the best way to limit input lag while still having a playable experience. 

Which is why you use g sync with v sync or use it with a frame rate limiter.

 

See my edit.

5 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

EDIT: It's worth noting that these test were done above 60 fps (where fast sync works the best) whereas iirc the monitor refresh rate was 60 hz

They essentially tested it in best case for fast sync. Say the frame was rendered in the middle of a refresh cycle. You would have to wait 10 ms extra, whereas with g sync/freesync you wouldn't have that 10 ms extra.

[Brooksie359]

4 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

Small? With fastsync it's like 15% and with v sync it's double...

 

Not saying fast sync is horrible or anything. It's pretty good. But it's not as good as freesync or g sync due to its inherent limitations. With freesync and g sync your monitor refreshes when the frame is displayed. With fast sync you display the frame and you don't see it until your monitor refreshes.

you do realize that fastsync is only for when your fps is higher than your refreshrate and that is the only solution to screen-tearing in this scenario. so you can either have a ton of screen-tearing and the least amount of inputlag or you can have a very low input-lag gameplay with zero screen-tearing. 

[Brooksie359]

4 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

Which is why you use g sync with v sync or use it with a frame rate limiter.

 

See my edit.

They essentially tested it in best case for fast sync. Say the frame was rendered in the middle of a refresh cycle. You would have to wait 10 ms extra, whereas with g sync/freesync you wouldn't have that 10 ms extra.

the freesync wouldn't have been working if your fps is higher than 60 fps on a 60hz monitor. so you are basically comparing fastsync to not having anything once again. I mean you even talked about how you use combinations of gsync and other software solutions but you didn't realize that comparing the input lag of gysync to fastsync when fps is higher than refreshrate is dumb because gsync would be basically disabled. 

[Brooksie359]

10 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

Which is why you use g sync with v sync or use it with a frame rate limiter.

 

See my edit.

They essentially tested it in best case for fast sync. Say the frame was rendered in the middle of a refresh cycle. You would have to wait 10 ms extra, whereas with g sync/freesync you wouldn't have that 10 ms extra.

also you are going to have more input lag with vsync or framerate limiter combined gsync when compared to fastsync. 

[DocSwag]

24 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

you do realize that fastsync is only for when your fps is higher than your refreshrate and that is the only solution to screen-tearing in this scenario. so you can either have a ton of screen-tearing and the least amount of inputlag or you can have a very low input-lag gameplay with zero screen-tearing. 

Wait fast sync only works above monitor refresh rate? I was always under the impression it was always on... unlike enhanced sync.

15 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

the freesync wouldn't have been working if your fps is higher than 60 fps on a 60hz monitor. so you are basically comparing fastsync to not having anything once again. I mean you even talked about how you use combinations of gsync and other software solutions but you didn't realize that comparing the input lag of gysync to fastsync when fps is higher than refreshrate is dumb because gsync would be basically disabled. 

 

13 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

also you are going to have more input lag with vsync or framerate limiter combined gsync when compared to fastsync. 

Not when fps is below refresh rate.

[Brooksie359]

Just now, DocSwag said:

Wait fast sync only works above monitor refresh rate? I was always under the impression it was always on... unlike enhanced sync.

 

Not when fps is below refresh rate.

fastsync was originally intended to be paired with gsync. I am uncertain if it is always on or not but I only have it enabled when playing games that are higher fps than my refreshrate which is basically all the games I play. 

[DocSwag]

5 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

fastsync was originally intended to be paired with gsync. I am uncertain if it is always on or not but I only have it enabled when playing games that are higher fps than my refreshrate which is basically all the games I play. 

Derp. I've been confusing fast sync this whole time...

 

Well that explains things. I still say fast sync is not a straight up replacement for g sync/freesync (and for me at least adaptive sync tech matters a lot since image quality matters a lot more to me than fps so I would rather turn settings up and have fps go lower) but now your points start making sense  

[Brooksie359]

7 hours ago, DocSwag said:

Derp. I've been confusing fast sync this whole time...

 

Well that explains things. I still say fast sync is not a straight up replacement for g sync/freesync (and for me at least adaptive sync tech matters a lot since image quality matters a lot more to me than fps so I would rather turn settings up and have fps go lower) but now your points start making sense  

I have a 1070 and a 1080p monitor so I just run basically all the games I play at max settings and it still is usually over 60 fps. I mean I play overwatch most of the time though so fast sync is the only way I can even compete at the rank I am at as dps.