V-Sync helps reducing lagging?

[andiey]

I was playing Stars War.
The game movies played @ 1253 FPS!!
And in-game, FPS was all good well over 134. Problem was stuttering.
So I turned VSync on to lock it to my cheap BenQ monitors refresh rate @ 60 FPS.


NOW, it's butterly smooth. Why? is that so?

 

[P4-630]

What Is VSync, and When Should You Use It? | Digital Trends

VSync might be an older form of frame synchronization, but if you don't have a G-Sync or FreeSync display and GPU, it can be a good way to stop screen tearing.

www.digitaltrends.com

You should try G-Sync/Freesync , it's even better.

 

[andiey]

What Is VSync, and When Should You Use It? | Digital Trends

VSync might be an older form of frame synchronization, but if you don't have a G-Sync or FreeSync display and GPU, it can be a good way to stop screen tearing.

www.digitaltrends.com

You should try G-Sync/Freesync , it's even better.

If say I have ASUS VG259QM which does 240Hz, what will happen when the game movies play? They are over 1000 FPS!?

 

[Zyll Goliath]

I was playing Stars War.
The game movies played @ 1253 FPS!!
And in-game, FPS was all good well over 134. Problem was stuttering.
So I turned VSync on to lock it to my cheap BenQ monitors refresh rate @ 60 FPS.


NOW, it's butterly smooth. Why? is that so?

Vsync is there so that we can avoid screen tearing maybe because of that you also getting the feeling of stuttering...and as @P4-630 said G-Sync/Freesync are even better solution but you need to have monitor that support that.....

If say I have ASUS VG259QM which does 240Hz, what will happen when the game movies play? They are over 1000 FPS!?

No game movies or movies in general are usually done in 30/24fps(standard) or 60fps(high frame rate/new movies)

 

[andiey]

No game movies or movies in general are usually done in 30/24fps(standard) or 60fps(high frame rate/new movies)

Sorry, I meant the cutscene

 

[Zyll Goliath]

Sorry, I meant the cutscene

Depend of the game but also Devs usually limit cut scene on 30/60Fps

 

[andiey]

Sorry, I made a mistake during observation.
Apparently, Stars War requires going in to video settings TWICE to update it.
After that's done, it's now butterly smooth whether I turn VSync on or off, a bit weird though.

But now I have another question: if VSync can lock on to the monitor's refresh rate say 60Hz or 75Hz, then why would I buy a 175Hz or 240Hz monitor with Free sync and G Sync, I mean what reasons I would give to myself for that decision?

 

[Zyll Goliath]

Because FreeSync/Gsync works better then Vsync...a bit better frame-time among the other things....here read THIS and you can see all the difference between them....

 

[andiey]

Because FreeSync/Gsync works better then Vsync...a bit better frame-time among the other things....here read THIS and you can see all the difference between them....

Thanks a lot, I need this it.

 

[Zyll Goliath]

Thanks a lot, I need this it.

NP @andiey I am glad I could help...

 

[andiey]

NP @andiey I am glad I could help...

I have read it. It's what I'm looking for - input lag.
Quite often in the past, I lost in multiplayer games like BF V and other shooters. Despite I m no esport professional, still winning means a lot to me. I suspect I lost to my own problem with the monitor.

Now I want to one thing, I'm going to get either a 3070 or a 3080 later. Either one of these can easily output over 100 FPS. So staying with a 1080p 60Hz monitor is really no way out correct?

 

[Zyll Goliath]

I have read it. It's what I'm looking for - input lag.
Quite often in the past, I lost in multiplayer games like BF V and other shooters. Despite I m no esport professional, still winning means a lot to me. I suspect I lost to my own problem with the monitor.

Now I want to one thing, I'm going to get either a 3070 or a 3080 later. Either one of these can easily output over 100 FPS. So staying with a 1080p 60Hz monitor is really no way out correct?

Basically you will see no use from such a powerful GPU if you stay on 1080p 60Hz....In my opinion IF it's high-refresh rate really that important to you then go for 1440p/144HZ monitor and RX 3070 will handle that resolution and that refresh rate with no problem in most of the games....

 

[andiey]

Basically you will see no use from such a powerful GPU if you stay on 1080p 60Hz....In my opinion IF it's high-refresh rate really that important to you then go for 1440p/144HZ monitor and RX 3070 will handle that resolution and that refresh rate with no problem in most of the games....

Firstly, thanks for helping me with that article.
Have you heard of ASUS VG295QM ? It's a 24.5" 1080p / 240Hz monitor. The reason I choose 1080p is because I fear that even 3080 can't handle Watch Dog Legion when Ray tracing is turned on on a 1440p/144Hz monitor like ASUS VG27AQ1A.
At lower resolution with higher refresh rate up to 240Hz, hopefully, when a demanding game like Watch Dogs Legion tries to eat up as many frames as it can, the 3080 can still uses it's immense frame output power to compensate the FPS bleeding.

I could be wrong though...
What's your take?

 

[P4-630]

But be aware once you go high Hz G-Sync/Freesync you won't go back to 60fps...

I wouldn't recommend a high Hz 1080p monitor because you can run into a CPU bottleneck, I'd say 1440p 165Hz is the way to go with a 3080.

 

[andiey]

I wouldn't recommend a high Hz 1080p monitor because you can run into a CPU bottleneck, I'd say 1440p 165Hz is the way to go with a 3080.

Why the CPU is bottlenecked by the high Hz 1080p monitor? I'm lost.

 

[Zyll Goliath]

Firstly, thanks for helping me with that article.
Have you heard of ASUS VG295QM ? It's a 24.5" 1080p / 240Hz monitor. The reason I choose 1080p is because I fear that even 3080 can't handle Watch Dog Legion when Ray tracing is turned on on a 1440p/144Hz monitor like ASUS VG27AQ1A.
At lower resolution with higher refresh rate up to 240Hz, hopefully, when a demanding game like Watch Dogs Legion tries to eat up as many frames as it can, the 3080 can still uses it's immense frame output power to compensate the FPS bleeding.

I could be wrong though...
What's your take?

Also depends how well the game is optimized...you have the latest Microsoft Flight simulator and there even the RX 3090 can't gives you the solid 60fps......reality is that for majority of the games I am 99.99% certain that RX 3080 should be just fine for 1440p/144Hz but yeah IF for you is ray tracing and high refresh rate is more important then higher resolution then get the some 1080p/240Hz monitor.....

Why the CPU is bottlenecked by the high Hz 1080p monitor? I'm lost.

As you lower resolution then your GPU is capable to push-out more frames but also then your cpu needs to follow that and the pressure goes much more on his part thats why he become the bottleneck....but for example if you play your games on 4k res. reality is that your GPU will choke by itself on that high resolution and it's not that matter what cpu you have in the rig you can put some older I7 and the final result will probably be identical or much closer to each other to the RIG with better expensive cpu and that same GPU.....

 

[andiey]

but yeah IF for you ray tracing and high refresh rate is more important then higher resolution then get the some 1080p/240Hz monitor.....

So my hypothesis you also reckon is feasible?
I don't mind a lower resolution, and I love a higher resolution coz they are more beautiful but my distance from the monitor on my desk is only around 1.5 ft. I will have to move my head around to check everything on the screen like mini map and status bar things like that on a 27" monitor.

My eyes will be easier looking at a smaller monitor especially for games that takes 2 to 3 hours to enjoy.

But I have another question: if a game output over 240 frames to the 240Hz monitor, will I need to deploy VSync ?

As you lower resolution then your GPU is capable to push-out more frames but also then your cpu needs to follow that and the pressure goes much more on his part....but for example if you play your games on 4k res. reality is that your GPU will choke by itself on that high resolution and it's not that matter what cpu you have in the rig you can put some older I7 and the final result will probably be identical or much closer to each other with much better cpu and same GPU.....

I see now.

Well... It's now a difficult decision as to 1080p or 1440p

 

[Zyll Goliath]

So my hypothesis you also reckon is feasible?
I don't mind a lower resolution, and I love a higher resolution coz they are more beautiful but my distance from the monitor on my desk is only around 1.5 ft. I will have to move my head around to check everything on the screen like mini map and status bar things like that on a 27" monitor.

My eyes will be easier looking at a smaller monitor especially for games that takes 2 to 3 hours to enjoy.

But I have another question: if a game output over 240 frames to the 240Hz monitor, will I need to deploy VSync ?


I see now.

Well... It's now a difficult decision as to 1080p or 1440p

You will have no problem on those 240Hz monitors but then pick the one that suits your GPU if you have Nvidia get the Gsync compatible monitor if you have AMD/Freesync tho' I believe that now Nvidia using Freesync tech also on this newer cards....Anyway again really depends what is your priority IF is just gaming in fast paced games then go for the highest refresh rate but if you also love to enjoy in movies/videos the higher res is preferred....I was suggesting to you middle ground and in my opinion 1440p/144Hz is the sweet spot

 

[Rei]

Personally, like others I would recommend a 1440p IPS LCD monitor with at least 120Hz refresh rate & also at least FreeSync support, though I would recommend G-Sync instead if you are getting a Nvidia video card.

But lets make things easy for the sake of you, your budget & your comfortability level. If you don't care about high resolution or high refresh rate or both, then stick with the monitor you have now which I assume is a 1080p monitor with a refresh rate of 60Hz. Then go for whatever beefy video card you can afford, the more powerful the GPU, the longer it will last you without needing to upgrade. With that, you could crank the shit outta the graphical fidelity to the max with including Anti-Aliasing of current games as well as many upcoming games. And that's it. The only possible limiting factor in bottlenecking your performance few years down the line could be your Intel Core i5 & maybe your RAM which you did not specify it's capacity but if it's at least 16 GB RAM then you should be fine.

If you disable V-Sync, you could achieve a much higher FPS than the limitation of your 60Hz/FPS monitor to the limit of what your CPU, GPU & to a lesser extent, RAM can output. But this will introduce heavy screen tearing specific to your monitor. If you enable V-Sync, the visual output of your GPU will lock itself to your monitor's 60Hz refresh rate & output only a maximum of 60 FPS & will eliminate or at least reduce screen tearing as much as possible. This however, will cause input lag but as for how severe it is depends on your setup, your rig & your perception. A FreeSync & G-Sync supported monitor could reduce input lag to possibly being unnoticeable. Another minor issue is bottlenecking the full performance of your rig but that shouldn't concern you for too long as future games get better & more demanding, you will be getting more worth out of your rig you paid for. I call that future-proofing.

Hope you got the gist of it.

 

[andiey]

Personally, like others I would recommend a 1440p IPS LCD monitor with at least 120Hz refresh rate & also at least FreeSync support, though I would recommend G-Sync instead if you are getting a Nvidia video card.

But lets make things easy for the sake of you, your budget & your comfortability level. If you don't care about high resolution or high refresh rate or both, then stick with the monitor you have now which I assume is a 1080p monitor with a refresh rate of 60Hz. Then go for whatever beefy video card you can afford, the more powerful the GPU, the longer it will last you without needing to upgrade. With that, you could crank the shit outta the graphical fidelity to the max with including Anti-Aliasing of current games as well as many upcoming games. And that's it.

The only possible limiting factor in bottlenecking your performance could be your Intel Core i5 & maybe your RAM which you did not specify it's capacity but if it's at least 16 GB RAM then you should be fine.

If you disable V-Sync, you could achieve a much higher FPS than the limitation of your 60Hz/FPS monitor to the limit of what your CPU, GPU & to a lesser extent, RAM can output. But this will introduce heavy screen tearing specific to your monitor. If you enable V-Sync, the visual output of your GPU will lock itself to your monitor's 60Hz refresh rate & output only a maximum of 60 FPS. This however, will cause input lag but as for how severe it is depends on your setup, your rig & your perception. A FreeSync & G-Sync supported monitor could reduce input lag to possibly being unnoticeable.

Hope you got the gist of it.

That's my plan also, I mean stick with this cheapo BenQ GW2270, it's a VA panel but I don't know it's input lag specifications. Then I'll see how things go after getting the 1080p.
But I can imagine when the system is throwing in two hundreds of frames to the 60Hz monitor, the interruptions to keyboard and mouse input or II subsystems must be significant.
But I also worry about games that will bleed FPS badly when Ray tracing is on. By the way, is it true that 90% of games out there have some sort of reflections and ray traced effects without the help of nVidia RTX cards? I do notice for instance, The Division 2 looks quite natural with reflections and lightings in_game.

Back to the monitors, a 1440p 144 Hz costs $400 for some good quality ones. I'm just thinking do I need such professional mon like Asus TUF gaming VG27AQ1A. I can imagine though that they can vary their refresh rates to prevent framed spams from the graphics hardware.

My rig has 16 GB of Corsair Vengeance LPX CL11, not speedy ones.

Watch Dogs Legion at 1440p RT ultra below 60FPS

 

[Rei]

@andiey So I have edited my previous post to be a bit more detailed. You can spot the difference with my post that you have quoted before the edit.

But I can imagine when the system is throwing in two hundreds of frames to the 60Hz monitor, the interruptions to keyboard and mouse input or II subsystems must be significant.

I can imagine that could happen but I can't confirm that myself as you can see from my listed system specs, I have a weak rig by today's standard for modern video games to test that out. Others will have to verify that for us.

But I also worry about games that will bleed FPS badly when Ray tracing is on.

Dunno what you mean by "bleed FPS". Can you elaborate?

By the way, is it true that 90% of games out there have some sort of reflections and ray traced effects without the help of nVidia RTX cards? I do notice for instance, The Division 2 looks quite natural with reflections and lightings in_game.

That is doubtful as Ray-tracing is a costly & demanding implementation for both game developers & GPU so currently not that many video games has ray-tracing yet. That will change few years down the line as developers gets used to the tech & able to implement ray-tracing better & more often. With RTX cards, ray-tracing would be much less demanding as it has the ray-tracing cores to offset performance hit. BTW, reflections & lighting is a feature capability that is not exclusive to ray-tracing. One of them being Screen Space Ambient Occlusion & screen space reflection. They are considered to be one of the predecessor to ray-tracing.

Back to the monitors, a 1440p 144 Hz costs $400 for some good quality ones. I'm just thinking do I need such professional mon like Asus TUF gaming VG27AQ1A.

I believe Asus to be one of the top monitor manufacturer around, even if they tend to be a bit on the expensive side. Be sure to check for reviews to see if there are any pros, cons & issue that you need to be aware of. YouTube is a good place as any for a good top listed monitor. And be sure to only buy it if it would justify the cost. Don't want to be getting buyer's remorse.

 

[oobymach]

Many games are designed to be synced at 60hz, the Dead Space trilogy is a good example, you couldn't set the in game refresh more than 60hz or the game would be bugged.

 

[Khonjel]

I'll try to answer multiple question at once.

Stuttering happens at high fps is because it's making the CPU usage at or near 100%. 100% CPU usage means stuttering.

V-sync limits the fps to monitor refresh rate. So CPU and GPU both decrease utilization. But it has very high input lag so many people hate it. Also causes some micro-stutter.

G-sync and Freesync are different technologies that help mitigate tearing. Funny enough both Nvidia and AMD recommend turning on v-sync with your G-sync and Freesync monitor since the technology only works under the range. But fortunately 144hz or 240hz has less inherent latency than 60hz.

Fortunately both Nvidia and AMD have introduced driver level fps limiter that negates the need for v-sync (and its inherent latency). And most modern games come with their own fps limiter in the settings which have the least latency.

I won't tell you what is better for you 1080p or 1440p. Because it's subjective.

Ray Tracing is new and an exciting graphical fidelity feature. Basically reflective surfaces show real reflections. Light rays react like real life when blocked by objects for example even smoke. And this is just the start. More effects will follow.

As for performance penalty because of ray tracing, there will be loads of performance uplifting features to come. Nvidia's proprietary DLSS for example renders games at lower resolution and fill in the blurriness that comes with it with AI sharpening. Also VRS or Variable Rate Shader (part of DirectX 12 Ultimate) that puts more graphical fidelity to what's focused by the camera. But eventually future GPUs will be so powerful on ray tracing that performance enhancing techniques won't be needed.

 

[andiey]

I believe Asus to be one of the top monitor manufacturer around, even if they tend to be a bit on the expensive side. Be sure to check for reviews to see if there are any pros, cons & issue that you need to be aware of. YouTube is a good place as any for a good top listed monitor. And be sure to only buy it if it would justify the cost. Don't want to be getting buyer's remorse.
[/QUOTE]

It's a comfort to know Asus is good at making monitors

I'll try to answer multiple question at once.

Stuttering happens at high fps is because it's making the CPU usage at or near 100%. 100% CPU usage means stuttering.

V-sync limits the fps to monitor refresh rate. So CPU and GPU both decrease utilization. But it has very high input lag so many people hate it. Also causes some micro-stutter.

G-sync and Freesync are different technologies that help mitigate tearing. Funny enough both Nvidia and AMD recommend turning on v-sync with your G-sync and Freesync monitor since the technology only works under the range. But fortunately 144hz or 240hz has less inherent latency than 60hz.

Fortunately both Nvidia and AMD have introduced driver level fps limiter that negates the need for v-sync (and its inherent latency). And most modern games come with their own fps limiter in the settings which have the least latency.

I won't tell you what is better for you 1080p or 1440p. Because it's subjective.

Ray Tracing is new and an exciting graphical fidelity feature. Basically reflective surfaces show real reflections. Light rays react like real life when blocked by objects for example even smoke. And this is just the start. More effects will follow.

As for performance penalty because of ray tracing, there will be loads of performance uplifting features to come. Nvidia's proprietary DLSS for example renders games at lower resolution and fill in the blurriness that comes with it with AI sharpening. Also VRS or Variable Rate Shader (part of DirectX 12 Ultimate) that puts more graphical fidelity to what's focused by the camera. But eventually future GPUs will be so powerful on ray tracing that performance enhancing techniques won't be needed.

I have Asus TUF Gaming VG259QM in mind. It has an excellent input lag of 2ms. However, according to rtings.com reviews, it reports that the monitor's input lag @ 60Hz is 36ms. Is 36ms visually noticeable?
And under what condition will the game run at 60FPS if my graphics card is a RTX 3080 on this 1080p monitor? The only game I can think of is Watch Dogs Legion with RT ON Ultra settings, other games should be running at well over 100FPS.

 

[Khonjel]

I have Asus TUF Gaming VG259QM in mind. It has an excellent input lag of 2ms. However, according to rtings.com reviews, it reports that the monitor's input lag @ 60Hz is 36ms. Is 36ms visually noticeable?

I don't know why you're worried about input lag at 60hz. And this is one of the case where RTINGS's numbers without context confuses people rather than actually help them understand.

And under what condition will the game run at 60FPS if my graphics card is a RTX 3080 on this 1080p monitor? The only game I can think of is Watch Dogs Legion with RT ON Ultra settings, other games should be running at well over 100FPS.

Maybe in 4 years when games will have incredible graphical fidelity.