Are sync monitors worth getting or are they just a meme?

>>57848146
idk
my monitor has sync, but i hardly notice a difference from my last with nvidia vsync on

Without nvidia vsync, i dont get much tearing, so i guess it actually works pretty well
but frametiming without vsync is a joke, so i always have it on

Yes as long as the range is good

>>57848146
I have a 60hz freesync monitor and I'm really not impressed with it. barely notice any improvements between freesync on/off.
if you want smooth framerates go for 144hz.

>>57848735
Do you at least get no tearing?

That's all that matters. Tearing is fucking cancer.

>>57848146
Yes. Sync monitors are meme. 60hz is enough.

Why tearing is issue again?

As long as your GPU can handle your monitor's refresh rate properly without much waste, theres no need for it.

I bought an FHD IPS LED 24" freesync (HDMI) LG monitor for $150. 80hz. Why not eh?

>>57848735
>I have a 60hz freesync monitor
Why the fuck would you buy this? Also, why does this even exist?
>>57848162
>people buy sync monitors and then just use vsync
wat..
>>57848146
I like mine, the monitor flickers like fuck though at the 30-45 range with gsync on so I tend to make sure games can't get that low. I feel like it's already pretty hard to see the tear at 144hz without *sync though. I wonder if you can even see tearing on those 240hz monitors.

It only makes a noticeable difference at low fps (40-50). At higher fps it's just an expensive gimmick.
Get a 144Hz monitor and tune your games to run at 75fps+

>>57848947
>60hz is enough

THE HUMAN EYE CANT SEE MORE THAN 24 HERTZ PER SECOND

>>57848146
Its a meme. Why would you want something moving to appear slower?