I don't much care for 27" but just get these out to public already so we can get some variation.
1 Like
Like FreeSync?
2 Likes
You think there's a non-G-Sync controller out there that can do 10 bit 30-144hz at 4k right now or anytime soon?
HAHHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHA
There isn't even a controller that can do 30-165Hz FreeSync at 1440p thats not G-Sync, but you think that there's going to be one that can do 30-144hz at 4k? That's hilarious. The display controllers made by monitor makers are leaps and bounds behind what the v.1 G-Sync controllers can do, and the G-Sync controller had to be iterated upon to make monitors like this Acer and the Asus equivalent that was shown earlier this year possible. You won't see a FreeSync equivalent to this for a very long time, especially since there's not AMD GPU market-share to make it financially viable for any monitor maker to spend millions developing a display controller to push these kinds of refresh rates and ranges. The technical hurdles in place of a FreeSync 4k 144hz hdr panel are enormous.
2 Likes
And now show me the computer to get even 100 FPS in every game at 4k.
3 Likes
A couple of 1080 ti's or a single, high-end next gen card will probably get close.
1 Like
Very doubtful of that. Maxwell got Nvidia to 40 FPS, Pascal sits arround 60.
The magical card would have to be dual GPU to manage 144, with AMDs CF scaling of course.
Depending on what AMD got up their sleeves, 4k120 might be possible in games like Rise of the Tombraider with crossfire.
1 Like
There are definitely games that are above 60 fps on 1080 ti cards, and the difference from say 980 ti to 1080 ti is definitely not 40fps to 60fps.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11180/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-review
The gap between the two cards is regularly more than just a 50% bump, and its not like the 1080 ti is really that low of a starting point to begin with. Of course there are variations game to game, but the point being is that its not that far out there to predict that an 1180 Ti would be able to push 100fps+ in a lot of games at 4k. Every game? No. Lots? Probably.
1 Like
I get 100 fps 
1 Like
Or... you know, maybe nvidia could adopt actual spec standards for once and stop with the proprietary bullshit.
2 Likes
27" is pretty small however....
2 Likes
The G-Sync module is far ahead in terms of its technical capabilities over the Controllers that monitor makers have came up with, which is in part why Nvidia is trying to push G-Sync and not the mess that is FreeSync. Personally, I like G-Sync, because yes its expensive but its actually technically superior. Nvidia locking it down allows them to push an actually superior tier of monitors than what FreeSync can, because of the limitations of the monitor controllers that monitor makers have came up with.
1 Like
And what's to like about this? G-Sync and FreeSync is in essence the same thing (spoiler alert: Adaptive Sync is in the DP spec). If they were actually not dicks for once the whole industry could profit from it if they were to integrate it properly.
Give me one valid reason why it's good this thing is proprietary and not integrated regularly. (Hint: nvidia's bottom line is not a valid reason.)
2 Likes
The whole "GSync is superior." is just fanboism.
This is just another profit center for Nvidia which is starting to show cracks as the demand for inexpensive FreeSync will only increase after Vega is released.
1 Like
As of right now gsync options are superior
Oh no, I can see this will become a Roll Call for Team Greeners.
Are you accusing me of being a fanboy?
I use a freesync monitor with a 980ti, fight me
3 Likes
G-Sync, is a better built tech.
However its also more expensive and is limited to nvidia.
So ... Yeah
1 Like
a better option would be for whoever develops Freesync to somehow make it work with Nvidia products, giving the market some competition and forcing manufacturers to price Gsync monitors better.
1 Like
I don't think that is possible without Nvidia, as I believe they lockdown their GPUs.