TheDeeGee:

Still waiting for ultimate G-Sync solution, which would be some kind of adapter between the GPU and Monitor.

As far as I'm concerned, that isn't possible. The display controller can't dynamically change its refresh rate based on the input signal (because if it did, then that's what G/Free/Adaptive sync are). These syncs keep the refresh rate closely in-line with the frame rate, where it maintains a tear-free experience and hopes to prevent frames from being wasted (because doing that can cause input lag and micro-stutter). So, let's say you have a 120Hz display with a G-Sync adapter plugged in. The display controller is operating at a constant frequency, but the input source isn't. So, you're either going to get tearing or you're basically just doing 120Hz with v-sync.

Richard Nutman:

I had my eye on the LG 34GK950F, but on overclockers forums the number of buyers with downright broken panels is alarming! Hopefully with NV now supporting Freesync and Intel todo so in future, hopefully Dell will release more freesync panels.

That doesn't bode well, looks like it's the same tech as in the monitor I'm waiting for.

TalentX:

Why exactly do the majority of displays have built-in AMD FreeSync instead of Nvidia G-Sync again?

nVidia replaces the whole scaler section, including the scaler chip and board with their own chip and accompanying parts. This costs, according to sources (I can't remember where I read this, it was several years ago) 50$ in parts, the rest of the cost is I guess getting the job done and the profit. I haven't seen this personally, but people say that between the same monitors, one with gsync parts, and one with ordinary parts, the gsync one has superior image quality (I doubt that, unless the stock one was really bad). here is an exert from wiki about the module itself:

The module carries all the functional parts. It is based around an Altera Arria V GX family FPGA featuring 156K logic elements, 396 DSP blocks and 67 LVDS channels. It's produced on the TSMC 28LP process and paired with three DDR3L DRAM chips to attain a certain bandwidth, for an aggregate 768MB capacity. The employed FPGA also features a LVDS interface to drive the monitor panel. It's meant to replace common scalers and be easily integrated by monitor manufacturers, who only have to take care of the power delivery circuit board and input connections.

Amaze:

Right now I'm keeping my eye on the LG 27GL850G-B, I just worry it will be really expensive.

I'm also waiting on LG..... but i feel it wont come out till next year, 38GL950G-B, it could be easily my monitor for the next 5 years.

I am waiting for OLED or micro led, not investing any more in this 2005 tech. especially not in TN bloody panels, I don't know how people don't vomit at that 1998 tech...

gx-x:

I am waiting for OLED or micro led, not investing any more in this 2005 tech. especially not in TN bloody panels, I don't know how people don't vomit at that 1998 tech...

Just because you do not like tn doesn't mean it is not preferred by many. All technologies, tn, ips, va, oled etc. Have their faults. I can't stand IPS screens due to IPS glow, it is the most horrid thing i have ever seen. All VA screens i have ever used have a ghosting/smearing issue, for instance when scrolling down on a white background and black text. (144hz and 100hz models, just so someone doesn't say it was because i got a 60hz model) This leaves me with OLED, which is far too expensive currently, and therefore, i must go with a high quality, 8-bit or better TN model. I don't have IPS glow, i don't have smearing/ghosting, and i get great colors. I don't need better viewing angles or "more accurate" colors. TN, is best case scenario for me, hence why i am looking forward to this monitor: https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/accessories-and-monitors/monitors/gaming/Lenovo-Legion-Y27gq-Monitor/p/DD116LPY27G Personally i feel that if you were to try out a high quality tn panel and not purposefully view it from an angle you wouldn't use it at, you probably wouldn't think its "vomit inducing" and if you really do still you're probably just being an elitist. That said, everyones tastes are different.

tsunami231:

only cost a lot cause Nvidia says so, I still think Nvidia handled the whole G-sync thing wrong

I did not see myself saying anything different 😉

gx-x:

nVidia replaces the whole scaler section, including the scaler chip and board with their own chip and accompanying parts. This costs, according to sources (I can't remember where I read this, it was several years ago) 50$ in parts, the rest of the cost is I guess getting the job done and the profit. I haven't seen this personally, but people say that between the same monitors, one with gsync parts, and one with ordinary parts, the gsync one has superior image quality (I doubt that, unless the stock one was really bad). here is an exert from wiki about the module itself:

Surely those scalers aren't in use if you're running at native resolution though ? On the subject of Gsync vs Freesync, often GSync monitors are lower quality to try and recoup the cost of the Gsync module. For example, compare the LG 34GK950F/G here; http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/lg_34gk950f.htm#f_g_comparison I've seen this across quite a few monitors that have G/Freesync variants.

They are always in use, it's the whole electronics of the monitor save for OSD, but that gets changed also. When they make monitor G-sync, it's basically a different monitor, the case, the panel, the backlight, those stay the same, but electronics is changed. this is what you overpay extra for:

https://images.techhive.com/images/article/2015/03/gsync-module-100574302-orig.png

waltc3:

That's what nVidia's custom G-Sync is...the "adapter" is extra circuitry inside the monitor housing. That's why G-Sync adds ~$200 to the price of a monitor. Doesn't apparently work any better than the hardware-free version that AMD turned over to the public domain, that nVidia is using here. However, I don't use either and I never see the artifacts that it is claimed one is supposed to see sans G-sync or Free-sync...;)

NCC1701D:

That's a really cool idea. Does the gsync module require some kind of special tuning to work with the specific monitor it's embedded in? Would be neat if you could just plug a small adapter into a monitor between the display cable or plug it into the monitor's USB port. It seems like from these recent moves that Nvidia might move away from the Gsync module altogether in the future. I'm not educated enough on the topic admittedly, but isn't Gsync considered superior to Freesync if you take the added cost out of the equation? I thought it allowed for lower input lag and higher range of Hz to be covered, but I could be mistaken.

I think the whole purpose of G-Sync was to replace V-Sync. In order to sync frames with the display refresh rate using Vsync, there is the effect that Vsync rises the latency between GPU work process and display presentation. G-Sync is capable of taking care of the Vsnyc operation without latency issues, while also avoiding screen tearing in cases when Vsync is off. Although most GPUs are fast enough to be capable of running Vsync just fine without the user noticing any lags, it may still affect performance in some way when frame drops trigger. My display (BenQ XL2420G) have a built-in Gsync module installed and I've tested the difference between G-Sync and V-Sync and I must admit that it works great indeed. In some scenarios I've even gained a few fps when Vsync was off while Gsync on. I paid like 480€ for the display back then when it was new. To me it was a fair price I guess, as I couldn't find any better 144Hz display for a budget with ~500€ that I liked anyway, even without G-Sync the options with other displays I've had were meh. However I didn't know that G-Sync alone was responsible for the display price to rise for the 150-200 bucks that was mentioned here already. However, I personally don't want to give away the hardware solution with G-Sync, because it really works great in my opinion. Considering upgrading my displays, the options that support the built-in G-Sync solution are getting less it seems, and my favourite displays that I'd consider purchasing only support AMD Freesnyc anyway. The compatibility of Gsncy with FreeSync might be all good and so on, but this is something that works only on specific models better than others, which is just again another "+/-" comparison, instead of full compatibility. So I don't know what to think of this right now.

tsunami231:

only cost a lot cause Nvidia says so, I still think Nvidia handled the whole G-sync thing wrong

Let's say that's true. I wonder then, why does Nvidia try to make AMD FreeSync work over G-Sync, also taking the responsibility and costs that this project comes with, instead of making the hardware solution with G-Sync available to display manufacturers for a fair and more competitive price?

Aura89:

All technologies, tn, ips, va, oled etc. Have their faults.

This. In addition there is also the faults that all of them can be affected with such as backlight-bleeding, banding, colour-banding, screen flicker, input-lag etc. and there is a lot of such models that have these faults regardless of the panel they use.

TalentX:

Let's say that's true. I wonder then, why does Nvidia try to make AMD FreeSync work over G-Sync, also taking the responsibility and costs that this project comes with, instead of making the hardware solution with G-Sync available to display manufacturers for a fair and more competitive price?

Because users who bought a freesync monitor would have preferred to stick with AMD or buy a new monitor to keep enjoying variable refresh. Now freesync monitor owners can switch to NV without losing any functionality. Making GSync a proprietary and expensive addition was always a stupid mistake.

kazama:

Did someone test the xl2730z?

Personally, my 2730Z is no longer working, as the menu options to force GSync have disappeared for me.

TalentX:

Let's say that's true. I wonder then, why does Nvidia try to make AMD FreeSync work over G-Sync, also taking the responsibility and costs that this project comes with, instead of making the hardware solution with G-Sync available to display manufacturers for a fair and more competitive price?

Last I checked AMD Solution is part of the VESA standard so there solution benefits everyone Nvidia technical has to support cause it part of the standard ALL monitors use. nvidia was just disabling it via there drivers or own hw not sure which.