A little advice for my new PC!

[=VG= Connor]

1 hour ago, Cruizer said:

Alternative, u can find monitors with the word, 'Adaptive Sync' on it which means it do accept both Nvidia & Radeon GPUs

 

OR do this ---> Enable G-Sync on FreeSync Monitor

Man that's a relief. G-sync monitors are either very hard to find at the price I want or they're all just expensive. I think I will go with a FreeSync and transform to G-Sync. Thanks cruizer!

[Cruizer]

5 minutes ago, Connor said:

Man that's a relief. G-sync monitors are either very hard to find at the price I want or they're all just expensive. I think I will go with a FreeSync and transform to G-Sync. Thanks cruizer!

Never buy G-Sync ONLY Monitor if ur on budget as the Monitor company has to pay premium to Nvidia for the G-Sync Badge which hike the cost of the monitors. Including the SLI Badge on motherboard

 

Nvidia being their usual Nvidia. Sucking money from royalties of having their badge being plastered anywhere that can be placed at.

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

On 10/13/2020 at 11:19 PM, Cruizer said:

Never buy G-Sync ONLY Monitor if ur on budget

I dunno about this advice.  The Monitor is your main portal to gaming, and is the key component that your entire gaming computer is all about.  The PC drives frames to the Monitor, and the Monitor is the least frequently replaced part of the entire system.  While it's important to stick to a budget, it's also important to ignore a swing of $30-50 either way when it comes to finding the Gaming Monitor that you are looking for.  Sure, there are "methods" to get things to work in a non-standard and non-native manner... and those methods may work very well, or there may be issues.  Freesync *may* be configured to work for your Nvidia card, or you may have headaches and problems, and massive regret later.  As I keep driving this home, I'll do it again:  research pays off.

The latest Gsync technology is Gsync "Ultimate", and there is NO way that any Freesync Monitor in a modified method to work with an Nvidia card will approach the true native functionality on par with Gsync Ultimate.  Even Gsync "Compatible" is yesterday's tech.

Buy what you can afford, whatever works for you... but know that these "methods" are just that, and there is a reason for that "premium" charge when a company applies a proprietary technology to a monitor.  It's not just a sticker with an Nvidia badge on it -- it's the advanced post processing that all monitors do with additional processes from Nvidia for all these fancy new v-sync options that are above and beyond anything that has come before.  You might want to read up on what v-sync is, how it works, and how AMD (and FreeSync) and Nvidia (and Gsync) utilize the monitor's post processing to communicate with the GFX card to achieve sync with far greater performance and fewer negative drawbacks than back in the day when we only had simple "v-sync" options.

I would hate to be this guy:
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/geforce-graphics-cards/5/378836/problem-with-freesync-and-nvidia/?topicPage=1

[Cruizer]

Since his under tight budget, so no choice unless pump in more cash to get a better monitor with G-Sync Only or Adaptive Sync OR drop/downgrade something else from the current list & re-route the amount towards the monitor cost.

 

There's pros & cons of having a tight budget since computer parts are not that cheap in certain countries thanks to VAT & etc that has been imposed.

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

17 hours ago, Cruizer said:

There's pros & cons of having a tight budget since computer parts are not that cheap in certain countries thanks to VAT & etc that has been imposed.

Tru dat!  I use a 1080p at 144Hz, and it's from the generation of "Nvidia 3D Vision Ready"... before the wave of monitors that actually sync with the graphics card, as opposed to the other way around for previous "dumb" monitors and standard old v-sync.

I don't even use v-sync in a majority of games that might even benefit from it, just out of forgetfulness or lack of time setting things up proper, and the experience is not awful or else I'd have been spurred to actually re-set up such things now that I have a better PC and GFX card (on the same 2015 gaming monitor)... it's gonna come down to the user, too.  I'm merely coming from the forward-looking-back point of view, so Monitor first, paired with the desired graphics card that can drive it, on a Motherboard with the desired options and required support, and THEN choosing the sufficient CPU and RAM combo for such a board, and then choosing the appropriate Power Supply that can drive it, and then the fastest drive or combination of drives to be the brains and long term memory of the computer, expandable or easily upgradeable* later down the road.

*(I can run PCIe Gen 4 NVMe's but offerings slim, so I bought last gen NVMe's, with options for future if needed - I'm sure I could find somewhere else to make use of these Gen3 NVMe's, they wouldn't be wasted).

So I look from Monitor backwards through to storage, rather than from GFX card and CPU/MoBo/RAM, storage, then PSU, then Monitor.  Different strokes for different folks.  

 

edit:  P.S. Ideally, the storage would be the bottleneck of a system, where everything was able to function as fast as the data could be retrieved from storage, but that's not always the case.  I'm fine with my CPU being the bottleneck even, so long as it's sufficient to run the programs I want and the GFX card is powerful enough to drive the resolution and FPS range at high/ultra detail levels in game settings.  The worst case would be for the bottleneck to be the Monitor at a lower refresh rate, especially if also a very high resolution, if you're the type to favor PC gaming for it's far greater than console FPS ranges, like 80-240+ at high/ultra detail game settings, but I'm sure some of that is subjective - I'm not down for 4K until I'm running something as powerful as the new 3000 series Nvidia cards, cuz I'd not want to drop in-game settings just to achieve higher than 60FPS averages or even 5%/1% lows.  Just IMHO, I'm a high FPS, high details guy.