Source
r/buildapc•
Megabyte2

Freesync Is Worth Considering

Discussion

Following the recent thread regarding the importance of Gsync, I think adaptive sync is something that needs to be considered more often.

If you're building a whole new setup or doing a pretty big upgrade which includes the monitor and GPU, consider adaptive sync. Freesync/Gsync changes your screens refresh rate to match your FPS, eliminating screen tearing and reducing stuttering.

Freesync adds almost no cost to the monitor and it is a feature often overlooked when comparing graphics cards. Currently only AMD supports it though Intel has plans to implement support for variable refresh. It is based on a open industry standard known as DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync.

Gsync requires manufacturers to implement a Nvidia provided module into the monitor. This increases the cost of the monitor and forces compatibility with only Nvidia GPUs. Nvidia can choose to support DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync as it's open, but I wouldn't hold your breath.

When comparing common graphics cards like the AMD RX 480 and Nvidia 1060 it is often an overlooked feature. We all know that the 1060 is overall the stronger card, especially in today's DX11 games, but if you were getting a new monitor the RX 480 could potentially give you the better overall experience thanks to Freesync. It is not true in all cases as it depends on the games you play and the type of monitor you want, but it's worth considering before making a purchase.

It is not an absolutely essential feature that you need to rush out and replace your monitor with as you could easily enjoy games without it. With this in mind, Freesync is certainly worth considering, especially since the feature does not increase the cost of the monitor.

TL:DR: When comparing similar graphics cards from AMD/Nvidia and are planning a monitor upgrade, consider Freesync before making a final decision. It could improve your overall gaming experience by removing tearing and significantly reducing stutter.

Posted Sep 24, 2016, 9:09 AM UTC · edited

1424
Hard_Celery•

Just make sure to pay attention to the freesync range. And because freesync is open source.

The people who say G-Sync is noticably better are likely comparing cheap fresync monitors to their always super exspenive gsync monitors.

Also check out the "Wasabi Mango" tv's if you want a big 4k monitor with freesync for a cheap price.

13
Sloomp•

What's an ideal size for a 4K TV? Does pixel density work the same as it does on monitors?

1
Hard_Celery•

Depends what you mean by ideal, size and distance work about the same as HD. The farther away you are the less you'll notice the difference. Using a 55" myself.

Yes, pixel density will decrease with size but they will all have the same amount of pixels because pixels=resolution.

1
rhinestoneBones•

I just built my first pc and I had to outlay cash for everything, including a desk and a chair... Things you don't think about when you initially set a budget. So for me the decision to get an RX 480 and a freesync monitor far outweighed getting a marginally better 1060 and not being able to afford a gsync monitor. Even without needing a desk/chair if you're on a budget the bang for your buck ratio is far better with AMD/freesync than nvidia/gsync.

6
bhazard451•

If the 1070 supported freesync, I would own it over the RX480, as I have a 144hz freesync ips monitor. Adaptive sync and HDR together into future tvs and monitors will heavily favor me with staying freesync/AMD until NVIDIA starts supporting it.

3
Jaysallday•

Looking at getting a Msi rx 480 4gb and a 60-75hz monitor with freesync. Is that a better idea then the rx 480 and a 144hz monitor without freesync? i mostly play csgo and not sure if the rx 480 4g can push 150 fps+ on high settings.

2
Megabyte2OP•

144Hz would be a better choice. The higher refresh rate makes everything look more fluid, feel more responsive, much less tearing compared to 60Hz and less blur on fast moving objects. A RX 480 can easily do 150FPS+ on CS:GO high at 1080p.

There are a few 144Hz Freesync monitors pretty much the same price as a 'normal' 144Hz.

2
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
randomaatti•

144hz, I get over 300 fps on most maps in CSGO with my gtx970.

2
Dunskap•

I would consider freesync if amd had a suitable graphics card for 1440p

1
nwgat•

isnt the fury/x pretty good at 1440p?

2
Dunskap•

yeah its pretty good. 5-10% worse than the 1070 depending on the game but can't overclock as well.

hopefully the 490 will be better

1
comfortablesexuality•

Fury X is pretty damn cheap right now though too, eh?

2
Dunskap•

I would say Fury x's go on sale for $350 and GTX 1070's go on sale for $380 ish

2
Fugiocent•

The sapphire R9 fury that's on sale for $300 should be able to net 60+ fps in most games (excluding gameworks shenanigans) at 1440p on the highest settings, and freesync should pick up the slack in the few instances where it falls short.

I would say the bigger problem is that the two ips 1440p 144hz freesync monitors on the market have pretty serious problems. One has ghosting issues, the other has a limited freesync range unless you apply a third party mod, and both have noticeably worse image quality than their top end gsync competitors. I compared the Acer xb271 with the Asus MG at my local microcenter and there is no getting around the fact that the former just looks objectively better.

2
Dunskap•

I'd rather just get a $350 fury x than the normal fury tbh

I can't speak for IPS displays but my $350 1440p 144hz freesync TN monitor is doing great. The gsync equivalent would be $500+

2
Fugiocent•

Are you talking about the $380 XFX version that's $360 after the rebate? I don't know if the 5-10% performance difference is worth $60, and at that price we have start asking ourselves if we're not better off either jumping straight to the 1070 or waiting for Vega.

I considered the XFX Fury X but went with the $300 sapphire fury not even for the price but because I had no idea where to put the radiator.

1
Megabyte2OP•

Freesync doesn't have an effect on image quality. Both of the IPS monitors use a similar panel to the comparable Gsync monitors. If anything it's probably the factory settings that need a bit of tweaking.

The Acer XF270HU has an overdrive issue when connected through displayport with an AMD GPU. Sadly, I was unable to turn on overdrive so there was a pretty noticeable ghosting effect.

The Asus MG279Q is, despite the limited Freesync range, the better monitor in my opinion. Overdrive works wonderfully and response times are not that far off similar Gsync IPS monitors which is nice, especially considering it's cheaper cost. It's just a shame that Freesync only works between 35Hz-90Hz on this model.

Freesync can be hit and miss on some models as it's up to the manufacturer to implement it. Freesync monitors have been improving compared to the earlier models and hopefully they will continue to do so. There are some nice TN models at the moment though I'm hoping new IPS ones are being worked on (fingers crossed!).

If you put Gsync and a properly implemented Freesync next to each other I doubt anyone would be able to tell a difference in games.

2
Titanic09ful•

Overdrive is actually on by default on the xf270hu and you cant change that

Edit: Heres an official response on that topic http://community.acer.com/t5/Monitors/XF270HU-Overdrive-and-firmware-bugs/m-p/405267#U405267

1
Fugiocent•

I don't know what it was, all I can tell you is that I used both the Acer xb271hu and Asus MG279Q and could immediately tell the difference in image quality just from looking at the desktop, both out of the box and after calibration. I don't think Freesync is the culprit; it could just be that the Asus panel is simply not as good.

1
Hobo_Hypnotist•

This is definitely the post I wish I saw before I built my first PC. That being said I'm extremely happy with my 1060 and I got the dell s2716dg on sale for $450 so it worked out fine in the end.

1
[deleted]•

[removed]

1
[deleted]•

[removed]

0