Just noticed that more and more monitors support FreeSync instead of G-sync.

Because it involves no extra work/parts. Adaptive-Sync is part of DP spec so Freesync just "comes with it" unlike Gsync which requires "special" hardware.

Because it involves no extra work/parts. Adaptive-Sync is part of DP spec so Freesync just "comes with it" unlike Gsync which requires "special" hardware.

To bad Nvidia does not support freesysnc even if it is part of DP spec or has that changed?, Nvidia ****ed up when they went the route they did with Gsync.

To bad Nvidia does not support freesysnc even if it is part of DP spec or has that changed?, Nvidia ****ed up when they went the route they did with Gsync.

Well they have their own Adaptive Sync which I think loosely uses the DP standard(I could be totally wrong but that is how I read it anyway)So they are having their cake and eating it too as I see it.

To bad Nvidia does not support freesysnc even if it is part of DP spec or has that changed?, Nvidia ****ed up when they went the route they did with Gsync.

They went the G-Sync route a year before Adaptive-Sync got ratified into VESA standard. And honestly up until very recently G-Sync had a number of features over Freesync, but whether those are worth the extra $$ is arguable. Now? They probably should just support Free Sync and make G-Sync a "premium" standard.

Well they have their own Adaptive Sync which I think loosely uses the DP standard(I could be totally wrong but that is how I read it anyway)So they are having their cake and eating it too as I see it.

It's not the same tech. Nvidia's Adaptive V-Sync is like a form of triple buffering.

They went the G-Sync route a year before Adaptive-Sync got ratified into VESA standard. And honestly up until very recently G-Sync had a number of features over Freesync, but whether those are worth the extra $$ is arguable.

What are the new features that freesync now has that it didn't before?

What are the new features that freesync now has that it didn't before?

Low Framerate Compensation, Windowed Freesync mode, Overdrive within the Freesync Window. G-Sync still has ULMB. I'd also argue that it has an advantage in operating range.. there are still brand new Freesync monitors shipping without LFC, with refresh ranges ending at 45hz. If someone doesn't know what they are looking for and simply buys a monitor because it says "Freesync", they could get one with a 45hz lower limit and have a bad experience. Also arguably an advantage, although not G-Sync specific, but Nvidia works with AU Optronics to build/certify G-Sync panels. Which is why the upcoming 4K 144Hz G-Sync IPS HDR monitors ASUS/Acer are developing are G-Sync only. The AU Optronics panel in them was designed in conjunction with Nvidia. Although I'm sure LG/Samsung/Other people will eventually build Freesync equivalents.

Low Framerate Compensation, Windowed Freesync mode, Overdrive within the Freesync Window. G-Sync still has ULMB. I'd also argue that it has an advantage in operating range.. there are still brand new Freesync monitors shipping without LFC, with refresh ranges ending at 45hz. If someone doesn't know what they are looking for and simply buys a monitor because it says "Freesync", they could get one with a 45hz lower limit and have a bad experience. Also arguably an advantage, although not G-Sync specific, but Nvidia works with AU Optronics to build/certify G-Sync panels. Which is why the upcoming 4K 144Hz G-Sync IPS HDR monitors ASUS/Acer are developing are G-Sync only. The AU Optronics panel in them was designed in conjunction with Nvidia. Although I'm sure LG/Samsung/Other people will eventually build Freesync equivalents.

Well as someone with a Freesync monitor I find the whole thing to be rather a "gimmick" My monitor does 144Hz so that is where I go first. My monitors Freesync range is 35-90. I use it in games that are "heavy" and I don't get high FPS then I use Freesync but again I will take 100fps "non-Freesync" over 90 with it on. I mean Games don't tear, I don't have input lag and 95% of my gaming is NOT using Freesync.

To bad Nvidia does not support freesysnc even if it is part of DP spec or has that changed?, Nvidia ****ed up when they went the route they did with Gsync.

Gsync was fine. At the time. But it has served its purpose, and at this point I really think its just Nvidia being stubborn. By not accepting VESA Adaptive Sync. Keeping Gsync as premium option and adding VESA would serve them better. For one I'd be on GTX 1080 long ago.

Well as someone with a Freesync monitor I find the whole thing to be rather a "gimmick" My monitor does 144Hz so that is where I go first. My monitors Freesync range is 35-90. I use it in games that are "heavy" and I don't get high FPS then I use Freesync but again I will take 100fps "non-Freesync" over 90 with it on. I mean Games don't tear, I don't have input lag and 95% of my gaming is NOT using Freesync.

Thats my experience too. High FPS coupled with high refresh eliminates ALOT of tearing. But not all. And I do prefer FreeSync over higher FPS, within reason

Well as someone with a Freesync monitor I find the whole thing to be rather a "gimmick" My monitor does 144Hz so that is where I go first. My monitors Freesync range is 35-90. I use it in games that are "heavy" and I don't get high FPS then I use Freesync but again I will take 100fps "non-Freesync" over 90 with it on. I mean Games don't tear, I don't have input lag and 95% of my gaming is NOT using Freesync.

1. Why do you prefer 100fps non-freesync over 90fps with freesync? My understanding would be that 90fps with freesync enabled would be much smoother and negates screen tearing and stutter when compared to freesync disabled or using regular vsync. Plus is there really a noticeable difference between 90 and 100fps? 2. When your saying games don't tear is that with freesync on or off? I ask this because I currently have a 980ti and a standard 60hz 1440p monitor. I was toying with the idea of getting a gsync monitor before the asus hdr gsync monitor was announced now I am waiting again. The massive appeal of freesync to me is the cost and so my point being if Freesync is as good as gsync ill wait for the freesync hdr monitors hit the market and pick up Vega gpu later this year. Which should be cheaper overall than a 1080 ti and a gsync hdr monitor. My main motivation to move to variable refresh rate monitors is to get the smoothest gameplay possible; I'm not too fussed about 100fps+ if I can get between 60-100fps with all settings maxed out (gpu/game dependent) and no stutter or screen tearing I'll be happy.