• We've upgraded our forums. Please post any issues/requests in this thread.

Question about vsync , tearing and crossfire

Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
276 (0.09/day)
Likes
33
#26
Yes, you're right. I do apologise for that.

I knew before the 60 Hz clock cycle was just that, which is why we're waiting for 120 Hz monitors. (120 Hz specified in the owners manual at a particular resolution)

What I was unsure of was whether the pixels were allowed to change themselves asynchronously or not.

So basically what you're doing when you turn Vsynch off is instead of waiting and taking a one snap shop every 1/60th of a second, you're allowing the information to update itself as long as its within that 1/60th of a second clock cycle, then the information gets sent out as a group which means that some pixels will be out of place resulting in tearing.

Having said that, response time is still important because if the response time were greater than the actually vertical frequency refresh rate, you'd get lower fps for sure.

In a game, it's very noticeable the difference between having Vsynch on and off. The screen appears to change much faster with Vsynch off, although you do get tearing.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
6,141 (1.67/day)
Likes
1,635
Location
Austin Texas
System Name silen8
Processor Intel i7 7820X Delidded @ 4.64Ghz / 3.1Ghz Mesh
Motherboard MSI X299 Tomahawk
Cooling 240mm Corsair H105 Intake
Memory 32 GB Quad 3434Mhz DDR4 15-16-16-38-300-1T
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX 1080 Ti Gaming
Storage 1Tb Samsung 960 Pro m2, 1TB Samsung 850 Pro SSD
Display(s) Dell 24" 2560x1440 144hz, G-Sync @ 165Hz
Case NZXT S340 Elite Black
Audio Device(s) Arctis 7
Power Supply FSP HydroG 750W
Mouse zowie ec-2
Keyboard corsair k65 tenkeyless
Software Windows 10 64 Bit
Benchmark Scores Cb: 2103 Multi, 209 Single, 10450 Timespy - 10150 GPU/11900 CPU, superpi 1M - 7.71s
#27
Yes, you're right. I do apologise for that.

I knew before the 60 Hz clock cycle was just that, which is why we're waiting for 120 Hz monitors. (120 Hz specified in the owners manual at a particular resolution)

What I was unsure of was whether the pixels were allowed to change themselves asynchronously or not.

So basically what you're doing when you turn Vsynch off is instead of waiting and taking a one snap shop every 1/60th of a second, you're allowing the information to update itself as long as its within that 1/60th of a second clock cycle, then the information gets sent out as a group which means that some pixels will be out of place resulting in tearing.

Having said that, response time is still important because if the response time were greater than the actually vertical frequency refresh rate, you'd get lower fps for sure.

In a game, it's very noticeable the difference between having Vsynch on and off. The screen appears to change much faster with Vsynch off, although you do get tearing.
Why would you apologize? I thought the discussion was rather good. :toast:
 
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
276 (0.09/day)
Likes
33
#28
>> Why would you apologize? I thought the discussion was rather good.

Because I've been thinking the same thing for quite a while now.

We're getting sold expensive graphics cards that are faster than our monitors can display. (hence tripple buffering etc)

As long as our graphics cards are able to output the same fps as our monitors frequency at whatever resolution / image quality then that's all we really need.

Here's a Samsung monitor that is approx. 120 Hz. (it actually lists less in the specs)

http://www.samsung.com/ca/consumer/...ors&subtype=lcd&model_cd=LS22CMFKFV/ZA&mode=C

I should also note that people have bought this monitor have been complaining that ATI doesn't support higher refresh rates in the new drivers, while Nvidia does apparently.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
183 (0.06/day)
Likes
21
Location
Austria
System Name bazinga 2.8
Processor i7 2600k @ 4.4GHz
Motherboard ASrock Z77 Extreme 6
Cooling Corsair H100i GT
Memory 32GB 1600Mhz
Video Card(s) MSi GTX 980Ti G6 1506/4005
Storage 512GB 840EVO, 3TB HDD
Display(s) BenQ XL2420T |BenQ XL2411T
Case Nanoxia Deep Silence 6
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium
Power Supply EVGA 1000G2
Software Win10 x64
#29
Here's a Samsung monitor that is approx. 120 Hz. (it actually lists less in the specs)

http://www.samsung.com/ca/consumer/...ors&subtype=lcd&model_cd=LS22CMFKFV/ZA&mode=C

I should also note that people have bought this monitor have been complaining that ATI doesn't support higher refresh rates in the new drivers, while Nvidia does apparently.
The samsung 2233RZ monitor was the first Nvidia 3D vision ready lcd monitor. Stores are offering this monitor + the 3d vision stuff in a set.

>> ATI doesn't support higher refresh rates in the new drivers, while Nvidia does apparently
I guess the green devil and samsung worked together, thats why Nvidia supported this from the start. Its just a guess, i guess :roll: