Should I purchase a 144hz screen and is G-Sync worth it?

Should I purchase a 144hz screen and is G-Sync worth it?
I have a 970.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=WpUX8ZNkn2U
blurbusters.com/gsync/preview2/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>970

No. There aren't many games (if any) that the 970 will be able to keep with the monitor's refresh rate.

>G-Sync

Would be worth it to you due to the aforementioned problem, but the expense probably outweighs the benefit.

>Would be worth it to you due to the aforementioned problem, but the expense probably outweighs the benefit.
So maybe a 60Hz with G-sync? Is that a thing?
I'm sorry for being so shitty, haha.

G-Stink isn't worth the good goy tax

ULMB is worth it. GSync is not.

>970
>wanting to buy gsync

you can sell your card, buy an rx480 and then buy an free sync monitor and be better off price wise AND have an better gpu

Sorry, I'm not here for memes.
I'm here for actual information, which was so kind to provide.
If you say G-Sync is bad, then please elaborate.
I'm obviously not very wise in this category.

Then you maybe you shouldn't have bought the 3.5 meme card in the first place

Doesn't having a 144hz monitor completely eliminate the need for gsync?

>Then you maybe you shouldn't have bought the 3.5 meme card in the first place
I didn't know it was a meme. I didn't come here when I assembled my PC.

>Should I purchase a 144hz screen
Yes, but it is only really worth it if you are playing a game that benefits from having 144hz like csgo.
>G-sync
No idea, my monitor doesn't have it.

No, given today's hardware, the need for it is increased if anything.

If you're desperate to upgrade and you have cash to spend, there's nothing I can do to stop you, but buying a new high-end monitor/videocard right now is the dumbest thing you can do. 10xx is still too slow for 4k60/1440p144, and both nVidia and AMD's offerings early next year should meet or exceed those standards.

If you don't think you'll be suffering from buyer's remorse in a year, 1080/G-Sync is probably the route you'll want to go.

bought a 1440p/144hz/gsync for my 970

totally worth it.
I player older shit and some new stuff.
Older stuff runs smooth with 144fps@1440p.
New shit like overwatch runs in 90fps@1440p, this is where gsync is important so I dont get 60fps because the 970 is not strong enough to get the 120fps@1440p.
Power hungry shit like doom 4 runs with 50-60fps, you wont feel the framedrops < 60fps because of the gsync.

Was worth the money, I wish I had bought that shit earlier. Was brainwashed a long time by Sup Forums because of that whole shit about:
>1440p is a meme, get 4k
>144hz is a meme, 30fps is enough
>gsync is a meme, it doesnt work

I hate this board.

again, ULMB is much better tech than g-sync. They can't be enabled at the same time, but ULMB is the successor to the strobe backlight lightboost hack. Once I enabled it I was actually able to "see' individual frames again like on my old CRT.

csgo is probably the main driving force to move 144hz monitors, if not for it it'd be "meme monitor" that no gpu could utilize.

'Yes definitely' for 144hz if you play competitive shooters and 'meh it can be' for gsync if you have something you want to play where you struggle to maintain 60fps

I've found the ideal scenario to be run almost everything at 120hz with a 90fps cap, unless its source engine or oldshit that i can guarantee a locked 144hz, the biggest benefit of gsync imo, is just one less thing to turn on/off per game

Yes and yes

I own a pg278q. The 144hz is the biggest deal to me. I can no longer enjoy a game at only 60 fps anymore. It will spoil your brain.

G-sync is as good as you hear. I havent seen a single screen tear ever and there is 0 input lag at all.

The 970 will be bottlenecking you, but it should still make old games fun (quake live is godly in 144hz)

Do it faggot

no if anything you need it more. When running 144 frames a second you will be getting screen tearing out the ass. G-sync fixes this and doesn't add any input lag like tradition v-sync does.

yeah but your monitor is only at 50% brightness

I kind of see the benefit to ULBM but I always am running it G-sync mode. Better colors, brighter, and no screen tearing.

>G-sync is as good as you hear. I havent seen a single screen tear ever and there is 0 input lag at all.
g-sync inherently causes a lot of input lag. Only Fast Sync will fix this (not out yeT)

>better tech than gsync
>comparing two totally different technologies

its like saying cars are better than bikes because they are faster.
what kind of retarded shit is that?
there is next to no scenario where ulmb is better than gsync.

wtf are you talking about.
maybe you confuse vsync with gsync because vsync is adding like 4f of inputlag not fucking gsync.

*4ms

>there is next to no scenario where ulmb is better than gsync.
what the fucking fuck? Motion blur elimination is the holy grail. 120-144hz without ULMB you cant even clearly read text on a web page if you scroll down,

Pretty much this

I'm using a 970 with a asus vg248qe w/ g-sync, and the refresh rate with gsync is life changing. Just for how much smoother browsing and gaming is, I'd recommend it if you can find one around $350

>g-sync inherently causes a lot of input lag
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. There is absolutely no input lag.

G-sync isn't just some game setting like v-sync, its a module added to the monitor that links up the GPU so the frames are dictated by the GPU not just the refresh rate of the monitor.

I'm reading your post right now and scrolling. 1ms response time really helps to eliminate blur. No real need for ULBM on the pg278q at least.

im not saying 144 hz are not better, i'd like to have a 144 hz screen myself. but i think it is not a requirement to become good at cs

10 years ago, consoles were capping shit ports at 30 fps.

Now theyre almost ready to accept that 60 fps should be the standard. And in reality PC enthusiasts have moved on to 120-144fps as the new standard.

Its going to take another decade for people to realize 60 fps is shit slide-show by todays standards

>not playing Quake Live
>not playing the new Unreal Tournament
>not play the new Doom 4
>not playing chivalry

Really any game will greatly benefit from 144hz. But it does really give a big advantage in fast first person games like csgo or quake.

after spending 3k hours at cs getting 144hz monitor is reasonably effective way to get better.

ULMB sucks dick

Why would you want to see invididual frames. ULMB makes even 144hz looks laggy and gives me a migraine, not to mention 90% of colours are gone. It also makes screen tearing more obnoxious. The only arguement to use it is for competetive advantage in games but even then it doesnt do anything since the motion blur is already so miniscule these 144hz 1ms monitor anyway its a non issue. Even pro gamers doesnt use it.

you're delusional then. I have a 144hz 1ms gtg asus gaming monitor as well. Without motion blur reduction its blurry as shit.

you must have played a minimum of 3 hours every day since its release to get 3k hours.

i have more than 10k hours myself (no idling). im not active in csgo, because the mouse movement is shit and generally the game is horrible. ive played most of my time on CSS and quite a lot in 1.6 too. I know every aspect of the game. in and out, no exceptions. it took me many many years to accomplish that. so if you really played those 3k hours, suit yourself to play a lot more

I have used freesync and I don't find it significant. Haven't used gsync but based on my experience variable refresh rate is kinda meh. I tested 35-90hz and 57-144hz freesync ranges and I found just a normal 144hz to be preferred because some games had issues running freesync (this may be resolved now I dont know). I would however take a newer freesync monitor or gsync with a full 0-144 range if it was the same price as the one without. I would not pay for it though. Coming from someone who paid $600 for a single monitor and would do it again in a heartbeat if something much better came out. (Old U3011h fags are probably laughing at this)

It adds 4ms on top of the refresh rate of the monitor?

g-sync adds lots of lag - period. Fast sync adds much less.

youtube.com/watch?v=WpUX8ZNkn2U

>144hz is only good for competitive games
I love this fucking meme. It immediately shows the person that says this does not own an at least 120hz monitor.

The question you should ask yourself is: do you want smoother gameplay for all your games? If so, get a 120/144hz monitor.

The difference is as big as 30 to 60 fps.

You are retarded. Get the fuck out of here and get educated before you spout shit.

stop shitposting

>g-sync adds lots of lag - period. Fast sync adds much less.

this is wrong

What kind of monitor should i buy with a 970?

>hurrrr durrrrrrrrrrr


this is you. G-sync doesnt add any input lag you daft fucking cunt.

this is cool because you don't need the g-sync hardware

that being said you are still wrong

Most people dont have gpu strong enough to run modern sp games 60fps+ so 144 hz monitor for them would only benefit games like csgo.

yes because csgo is the ONLY game that runs above 60 fps.

How retarded is Sup Forums today?

you benefit from 120hz+ not just in games also for regular desktop use like browsing shit online.
its not like you 100% of the time, I would guess its more like 90% surfing/shitposting and 10% playing.

And you arent forced to play new games only, everything from like 3-4 years ago runs great at 120+fps

this is not true at all kek

most modern games allow you to uncap the framerate

Its a question of "do I want twice as expensive monitor to enjoy smoother browsing shit online" then.

....im out. Goodbye

learn sarcasm kid

Mind if I ask what specific screen you have?

>he took the b8

970?

That shit can barely run solitaire.

Should of bought AMD faggot.

I'll have you know sir, my GTX 970 Runs faster than you because i custom modded legs on it.

It adds almost no lag.

blurbusters.com/gsync/preview2/

All in all, if you are playing a twitch shooter... ANY kind of sync = input lag. Those who think HUR DUR MURGURD SO SMOOTH NO TEARING GAYSINK OR FREESINK BEST are imbeciles.

this

Dell S2716DG

Don't listen to them. 144 Hz means your screen refreshes much faster. Screen tearing is next to invisible because the tear is on the screen for much less time than a 60 Hz monitor.

G-Sync is for plebs who want to get raped by NVIDIA. Spend the money on a better GPU instead.

Fuck no. Spend the extra money on a better GPU and get a 1440p freesync monitor. Nvidia cards work fine on freesync monitors and the extra performance you'll get by spending the $150-200 on the GPU will greatly outweigh having to use vsync.

Keeps you open to AMD cards and freesync as well and if Nvidia ever, not likely, allows their cards to be used with freesync.

freesync only works with amd gpu's yet you advice to get a "better" gpu.
what amd gpu do you think is better...

are you like retarded?

>retarded
>cannot understand what freesync + having to use vsync means

Are you retarded?

Instead of making my own thread ill attempt to hijack this one.

Im in the market for a 1440P 144hz freesync display. The size im aiming for is between 25-30" displays. The sweet spot seems to be the 27" area. Any recommendations?

Ive seen this one mentioned a few times ASUS MG278Q but im not aware of any others.

because there arent many other that don't suck dick.

Get the 278q

Concur. Can be had for ~$400. Used it with my 390 for a bit and was pretty good. Scaling works pretty good so 1080p consoles still look fine on it. Sound is annoying though, even at 1 volume it's pretty loud. I use headphones usually, but will use the speakers on occasion and it sucks that I can't have it a really low volume like I want sometimes.

Compared to gsync displays it's cheap enough to where the extra money saved justifies it even if you have a nvidia GPU. Unlike a lot of people I prefer TN panels due to input lag and their cheaper prices.

>I'm obviously not very wise in this category.

NVIDIA's target audience

>Should I purchase a 144hz screen and is G-Sync worth it?

I don't know.

I prefer TN panels because I enjoy watching movies with the lights out

IPS glow/bleed is absolute shit

get a super AMOLED screen mate.

as soon as they make a 120hz+ one, I will.

To be fair the ASUS has some bleed as well, but I usually play with some light so I don't really notice it.

I was thinking of returning it, but I still have note seen a comparable display for less than what I paid for it. I'm GPUless right now, currently waiting to see what the 480 is. I very well could go with a 1070 and just live with vsync.

no, get a monitor with Display port 1.3a support and force it to use freesync.

GSync and FreeSync both reduce input lag because most frames will appear slightly more quickly compared to the source frame.

You don't actually know what you're talking about, do you? Adaptive sync doesn't actually increase latency.

$600 for a 1440p shitty TN panel in the year 2016

I ha lve PG279Q and a 980 ti
144hz 1440p gsync is the best thing i gave to my pc xD

279q backlight bleed/ips glow is common and expected

278q has no backlight bleed and very solid dark blacks

tfw you don't have ComfyView

is that not just another name for ULBM?

From a bit of googling, it turns out that comfyview is Acer's anti-glare coating while flickerless refers to the backlight being powered by DC, which is pretty much the opposite of ULBM.

It's 400USD on Amazon

1440p monitors usually stay 350+ USD TN or not

AOC does make a 4k Freesync capable monitor @29 inches or so but it's sold out right now

Man, they must be pretty bad considering even TNs are nowhere near black if you've ever used a CRT.