Is G-Sync/Adaptive Sync worth it?

Hi!

I have 2 laptop options to choose from:

MSI GP76 with 10870H and 140W 3070 and 144 hz panel (No GSync) for 2000 EUR

ROG Strix G733QR with 5900HX and 130W 3070 and 300 hz panel (Freesync) for 2600 EUR

ASUS has lower TDP 3070 and no MUX switch so performance is lower, however has Freesync with the built in screen.

MSI has significatly better performance due to MUX switch and higher TDP vga. However does not have GSync or Freesync.

So far I only used G-Sync laptops and there G-Sync did not just make tearing dissappear but seemingly also made game look smoother compared to when I turned OFF G-Sync.

Was this just an optical illusion/software issue or I am right and G-Sync really does make games look smoother ?

Which machine would you buy? The cheaper one with better performance or the more expensive one with the chance of making games look smoother?



Thank you !

 

144hz gsync+fps cap to 141+vsync ON>>>>300 hz unless you play stuff like csgo competitively. No CPU/GPU combo can hit 300hz in modern titles at reasonable settings, assuming you already know this.
Tearing is more noticeable on refresh rates closer to 60 rather than say, 120+ but you can still see multiple fine tears if you look closely. So if you go in for 300hz keep that in mind.
300 vs 144hz is not massive, again I assume everybody knows that too.
V sync off should be as smooth as g-sync since there are no frame pacing issues related to vsync.
If your use case is casual gaming, get 144hz.

 

Or... you could wait and get the Clevo X170KM-G (144hz Gsync, 11600k / rtx 3070 MXM in 2600 eur range) - because GSync in my opinion worth it.

 

That would be an option, however I am afraid that it will be defective too like the SM-G series was. To make response time better, Clevo factory enabled lcd overdrive and did not allow it to be disabled. This is causing visible overshoot /inverse ghosting. Some people ignore it, some dont even see it because they think it is normal for an ips panel to look like that, however for me it is very annoying .

I could wait for reviews to see if Clevo messed up again, however there are too many "star youtube testers" who don't have the technical knowledge to tests this issue or they tend to ignore it because they are afraid to tell the truth so they could get free test units in the future too.

 

You didn't mention resolutions on those panels - Freesync / Gsync on a 1080p panel with a GPU which will never drop below 60 frames is a waste.

Between the two of those, I'd go with the MSI laptop. That Asus is much more expensive, and not worth it for gaming I would think. The 3070 likely won't dip enough into the sub-40-frame area to make either async option really useful.

 

Actually there is still a minor use case for it: capping the Fps to 59+vsync on will reduce input lag by a lot on a 60hz gsync without any stuttering or tearing

 

That's opposite of why sync technologies (and vsync itself) exist. Screen tearing presents itself when multiple frames are attempted to be drawn before vblank, as well there's buffers (seen as double/triple buffer) at play to not draw additional frames to the monitor when FPS exceeds the monitor's refresh rate. Sync technologies prevent that from happening. Adaptive sync can help with the stutter that can exist by disabling this tech when the framerate is under the monitor refresh rate.

There's probably a better explanation out there somewhere, but, tl;dr sync technologies are MOST useful when game FPS exceeds the monitor refresh rate.

 

I havent used gsync formally but I do appreciate my Freesync monitor, if they are the same in principle its something I would like to have, than to go without

 

I thought screen tearing only occurred (as a problem, not just rarely) when frame rate dropped below the refresh rate - I thought the adaptive/g-sync made the biggest difference in lower-refresh rate gameplay? You get some frametime stuttering at higher frame rates, but the artifacting is only really a problem when a frame can't be drawn 'in time' for the refresh?

 

It can actually happen either way if drawing a frame out of the buffer is out of sync with monitor refresh, I've always noticed it much more when my frame rate is marginally exceeding monitor refresh. Adaptive sync usually works great to stop it from happening while fighting input lag.

 

I'd go with the adaptive sync option. I'd rather have the lower framerate with more constant smoothness.

I've played around a lot with G-Sync on or off on my 360hz m17 r4 and while with it off I can no longer notice the tearing at that high a refresh rate, I still notice the small stuttering that occurs especially in open world games. With G-Sync on, the stuttering is smoothed out.

 

I'd never take a sync technology over raw performance. Settling for Optimus just wouldn't be an option.

My screen refreshes so fast that I've never seen tearing.

 

I have to start by saying I don't like the term casual gaming applied to someone who doesn't do the highest refresh/lowest graphics settings to play competitive online gaming. There is nothing about doing that which is more serious than gaming single player, either way you're playing a game and many of us are just as serious about our experience in single player as a gamer doing the sports thing. Casual in my mind applies to someone who doesn't game much playing Tetris on his/her phone while waiting for their turn to come up in the waiting room at the dentist.

My own preference is slightly different from what Kevin opined; I'll agree with maximum hp but I also want sync. Then I choose based on actual results.

 

MSI GT76 Titan DT-90 | 1080P/240Hz IPS | i7-9700K | RTX 2080 8GB GDDR6 (200W)| 16GB DDR4 | 1TB 960 EVO | 960GB Crucial M500 | Windows 10 Pro |

premo for another 3 years!!

and to the OP


No high refresh rate is king these days