PS4-lancering

Dunwich>
Ok, men hvad så med de her blu ray afspilnings børnesygedomme, jeg har læst om; Er det blevet fikset? Ville være lidt surt at opdage, at en håndfuld af ens blu ray film pludselig ikke kan afspilles.

Konsolkongen>
Hvis frameraten afviger fra 30 (enten dykker eller stiger) så vil nogle frames blive vist i længere eller kortere tid end andre, og det vil medføre hakken i billedet.

We replicated Nvidia's Montreal Tomb Raider set-up and found that the initial outdoor area the firm chose to demonstrate G-Sync really does showcase the technology at its best. The game is set to ultimate settings (essentially ultra, with TressFX enabled) producing frame-rates that smoothly transition between 45-60fps, the consistency of the refresh working beautifully in concert with the new display technology, producing a nigh-on flawless experience.

However, before we reached the first outdoor area, we had to contend with the game's initial stages, where a bound Lara frees herself from a cave-like dungeon, committing various acts of arson in order to move from one area to the next, before finally scrambling through the tunnels to freedom. It's at this point where we encountered G-Sync's ultimate nemesis - a remarkable lack of consistency in the frame-rate generated by the game. Suffice to say that TressFX remains a huge drain on resources, resulting in reported frame-rates of anywhere between 20fps and 60fps, Lara's "survival instincts" post-processing in combination with TressFX in particular proving to be the nadir of the experience.

When the game operates in a 45-60fps "sweet spot", G-Sync gameplay is exceptional, but the variation in performance overall just didn't work for us when we moved out of this window. Turning TressFX off gave us a locked 60fps experience from start to finish in the same area, producing the optimal way to play the game - but not exactly the kind of G-Sync stress test we were hoping for.

Dipping into the second BF4 campaign level - Shanghai - we instantly see variable frame-rates in the 40-60fps range, exactly the kind of spectrum where, theoretically, G-Sync works best.

Despite an improved level of consistency compared to Tomb Raider on ultimate settings, a lot more is being asked of G-Sync here - a first-person perspective invariably sees a greater degree of movement on-screen, with much more in the way of fast panning - exactly the kind of action that makes v-sync judder that much more noticeable. G-Sync reduces that judder significantly but the fact that frames aren't being delivered in an even manner produces observable stutter.

By running games completely unlocked, actual consistency while you play remains highly variable. G-Sync can mitigate the effects of this - but only to a certain degree.

There's a frame-rate threshold where the G-Sync effect begins to falter. It'll change from person to person, and from game to game, but across our testing, we found the sweet spot to be between 50-60fps in fast action games. Continual fluctuations beneath that were noticeable and while the overall presentation is preferable to v-sync, it still looked and felt not quite right.

And if our G-Sync testing has taught us anything, it's that - within reason - consistent frame-rates are more important than the fastest possible rendering in any given situation.

That being the case, with careful application, G-Sync opens up a lot more possibilities. In the era of the 60Hz monitor, the most consistent, judder-free experience we can get is either with a locked 60fps, or else the console standard 30fps. As we've discussed, theoretically, with G-Sync, target frame-rate could be set anywhere (40fps for example) and locked there without the stutter you'd have on a current display.

slk486>
Det giver sig selv at hvis der er store spring vil det stadig bemærkes