FreeSync vs GSync

[Kieran2001]

Hey Guys,

 

Is there a huge difference in FreeSync / G-Sync?

 

I understand one is AMD one is Nvidia - but considering specs are the same, is there any real difference?

 

Kier

[SolarNova]

They do the same thing but there are significant diferences.

 

FreeSynce:

Wider variety of monitors with it available,

No/small additional cost on said monitors

AMD graphics cards only

AMD GPU's are to slow to push high FPS in modern titles making variable refresh less attractive.

 

Gsync:

Lesser variety

Additional cost on monitors is significant

Nvidia only

Nvidia cards can push the higher FPS but cost more.

 

Both do the same, but both have a drawbacks. Freesync is easier to get, and cheaper all around, but since AMD cards cant push really high FPS ifgures, it kinda makes it pointless (depending on the game and settings)

Gsync is great but both the monitors that have it and GPU's u'd need from Nvidia to push the FPS, are expensive.

[Kieran2001]

1 minute ago, SolarNova said:

They do the same thing but there are significant diferences.

 

FreeSynce:

Wide variety of monitor wiht it available,

No/small additional cost on said monitors

AMD graphics cards only

AMD GPU's are to slow to push high FPS in modern titles making variable refresh less attractive.

 

Gsync:

Lesser variety

Additional cost on monitors significant

Nvidia only

Nvidia cards can push the higher FPs but cost more.

 

Both do the same, but both have a drawback. The Freesync is easier to get , and cheaper all aroudn, but since AMD cards cant push really high FPs ifgures, it kidna makes it pointless (depending on the game and settings)

Gsync is greta but both the monitors that have it and GPU's u'd need from Nvidia to push the FPS are expensive.

 

Thank you for the explanation, that makes a lot of sense and explains my current situation quite well.

 

In terms of 1440p / 144 hz would you suggest a vega 64 / freesync display would be suitable? or would you recommend paying the extra for Gsync?

[SolarNova]

1440p.. Gysnc & GTX 1080ti. hands down.

 

EDIT: it does depend on the games your playing, if its CS;Go for example ..then u wont need Gsync with a NVidia card,, but any AAA modern title, at 1440 aiming for 144hz, ur gunan need a 1080ti and a Gysnc display.

[Kieran2001]

1 minute ago, SolarNova said:

1440p.. Gysnc & GTX 1080ti. hands down.

 

EDIT: it does depend on the games your playing, if its CS;Go for example ..then u wont need Gsync with a NVidia card,, but any AAA modern title, at 1440 aiming for 144hz, ur gunan need a 1080ti and a Gysnc display.

 

Thanks Solar, might have to reconsider what I am aiming for as the 1080Ti plus the additional GSync costs are steep. My alternative was a 1080 + GSync Monitor and even then that was an increase of around £250

[SolarNova]

1 minute ago, Kieran2001 said:

 

Thanks Solar, might have to reconsider what I am aiming for as the 1080Ti plus the additional GSync costs are steep. My alternative was a 1080 + GSync Monitor and even then that was an increase of around £250

NP

 

Your best bet would be to find benchmarks for the games you play and see how they perform with a GPU that you can afford.

 

[mbox]

15 hours ago, SolarNova said:

AMD GPU's are to slow to push high FPS in modern titles making variable refresh less attractive

This statement is kind of BS, it all depends on the resolution and the game your playing. If you wanna play ultra settings 1440p 144Hz or something insane like 1080p 240Hz then yes but also the entire lineup of NVIDIA cards except the 1080ti is "too slow to push high FPS" so you should spend more than 1K for GPU+monitor to play at high refresh rates? A lot of people don't have that budget but can play 1080p 144Hz High settings using, guess what, an AMD gpu and a freesync monitor for less than 500$.

 

PS: if they are too slow to push constant high fps than variable refersh rate technology is even more attractive

[SolarNova]

3 hours ago, mbox said:

This statement is kind of BS, it all depends on the resolution and the game your playing. If you wanna play ultra settings 1440p 144Hz or something insane like 1080p 240Hz then yes but also the entire lineup of NVIDIA cards except the 1080ti is "too slow to push high FPS" so you should spend more than 1K for GPU+monitor to play at high refresh rates? A lot of people don't have that budget but can play 1080p 144Hz High settings using, guess what, an AMD gpu and a freesync monitor for less than 500$.

 

PS: if they are too slow to push constant high fps than variable refersh rate technology is even more attractive

 

18 hours ago, SolarNova said:

snip~

it does depend on the games your playing, if its CS;Go for example ..then u wont need Gsync with a NVidia card,, but any AAA modern title, at 1440 aiming for 144hz, ur gunan need a 1080ti and a Gysnc display.

 

18 hours ago, SolarNova said:

snip~

but since AMD cards cant push really high FPS ifgures, it kinda makes it pointless (depending on the game and settings)

 

 

[mbox]

1 hour ago, SolarNova said:

 

 

 

Yeah I know, didn't really like the way It sounded since performance wise the AMD lineup is on par with Nvidia from the 1050 to the 1070ti/1080 so telling that FreeSync is "pointless" wasn't a great answer to someone asking what's different between the two, remember that someone googling "FreeSync vs Gsync" could end up bere.

 

In this case (1440p 144Hz) I agree with SolarNova, 1080ti + gsync is the way.