I think this is likely what it is. I have experienced what you're experienced, choppiness at 60 FPS with Vsync OFF. Usually its just that the game engine has big frame time spikes. Sometimes its because without vsync you lose the frame smoothing lock-in that Vsync can cause in some game engines. I always play Vsync ON because of the increased smoothness and the fact I cant tolerate tearing at allIf you showed a video, we might better answer the question. At the moment, we can only guess.
Back pressure is a reason V-sync can be good. With V-sync on, the GPU is held back a bit, evening out the frame times. This results in a smoother delivery. This may vary from game to game as to how bad it is.
For the sake of knowledge, try a FPS cap at 65-70 without Vsync. I'm curious as to how that would feel to you.I'm just going to get a gysnc monitor and call it a day. While i can just cap it at 60 and it stays smooth the fact that it looks horrible without it is driving me crazy because choppiness should only occur below 60 regardless of vysnc. I should only be noticing screen tearing.
For the sake of knowledge, try a FPS cap at 65-70 without Vsync. I'm curious as to how that would feel to you.
That may be related to the fact the tear becomes much more visible when it matches your refresh rate. When you drop or raise it +2 to +5, it is less noticeable, and may not seem as jerky to you.weird thing is when I ran 60 fps cap I noticed jerkiness, when I lowered to 58 it was really smooth on 60hz. Also then increased to 70hz on monitor, 2fps does the trick.
No, without some form of sync you will get tearing and stuttering.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhLYYYvFp9A&feature=youtu.be&t=28m24s
You can't have truly smooth gameplay without either V-Sync with sustained FPS=Hz or VRR, there's no way around it. Sounds like you went with the latter. What Acer model did you buy?
Having it slightly above is enough for a good result, that's why I cap at 62.5 if I run without vsync. But if you can set an ingame fps limiter and vsync on the exact screen refresh rate you get the perfect result.It's usually bad on the visuals to have an exact match. You are usually best having it well above or below, otherwise you are most likely going to stare at a tear that never moves.
Have you tried this? The results I get is awful. You get a slowly moving line in the middle of your screen that may move up and down and cycle.Having it slightly above is enough for a good result, that's why I cap at 62.5 if I run without vsync. But if you can set an ingame fps limiter and vsync on the exact screen refresh rate you get the perfect result.
I have, 62.5 is far enough from 60 to get a good result, there's no static or slow moving tear line.Have you tried this? The results I get is awful. You get a slowly moving line in the middle of your screen that may move up and down and cycle.
The reason is simply. FPS limiters do not sync the refresh rate with your monitor. It simply makes them similar in the time between updates, but they are not sync to happen at the right timing. For the tear to be removed, the GPU has to update it's front buffer during the displays vertical blanking mode. Without G/V/Free sync, that doesn't happen.
That may work, though having your refresh rate slightly lower, may allow for the latency issue to creep back in. That's why when using V-sync, most drop the FPS 1 lower than their refresh rate.I have, 62.5 is far enough from 60 to get a good result, there's no static or slow moving tear line.
If I go for the exact refreshrate limiter I of course enable vsync. I got perfect results in the battlefront beta and assetto corsa (with 100hz crt screen and ingame 100 fps limiter). I dont think assetto allows me to limit at my lcd refresh rate of 59.95 hz however.
Doing this on a fixed refresh monitor is a terrible idea if you care about smoothness at all. Using a refresh -1 cap with V-Sync results in a regular hitch every second. It's subtle, and Average Joe probably doesn't notice, but it's there.
You can't have a 1fps mismatch between frame rate and refresh rate with V-Sync, and expect to see no consequence.
Using a frame cap = to refresh can often help in games that stutter with V-Sync for whatever reason, but capping a whole 1-2fps below the refresh with V-Sync enabled will cause hitching.
If you want low latency V-Sync, get a high refresh rate monitor (V-Sync latency at 120Hz is halved vs 60Hz), or a VRR one.
Lots of people swear by it, whether or not you think it is ill-advised. 1 frame in 60 being doubled up isn't that big a deal.Yes, and my point was that's ill-advised because of the trade-off. You're trading smoothness for reduced latency.
I always set pre rendered frames to the minimum value in nv control panel, can also do this in battlefield with a console command, renderaheadlimit or maxframesahead or something.That may work, though having your refresh rate slightly lower, may allow for the latency issue to creep back in. That's why when using V-sync, most drop the FPS 1 lower than their refresh rate.
That's actually a different issue all together. The extra frame the GPU renders ahead when reaching your refresh rate is something always present if the game uses triple buffering and DirectX (DX12 could have new rules here). The pre rendering is another bit of latency that can be had by allowing the CPU to prepare multiple frames before the GPU renders them.I always set pre rendered frames to the minimum value in nv control panel, can also do this in battlefield with a console command, renderaheadlimit or maxframesahead or something.
The default of 3 pre rendered frames (cpu is allowed to build up a buffer of 3 frames if the gpu can't process them fast enough) is what makes vsync so terrible for many people. With vsync you're throttling the gpu, so this buffer builds up, limiting a frame below like you do prevents this, since the cpu makes fewer frames than the gpu can offload to the screen, but not having the buffer also solves it of course.