Reviews   ::        

Articles   ::        

Home   ::        

Links   ::        

Archives   ::        

Search   ::        

About Us   ::        
 
HDTV Costs     

HDTV Guide     

Diskeeper 9     

Stor n Go PRO     

Blade SSD Server     

 
     
 
 

 
  Unraveling the mystery of VSYNC
 
 

Author: Agi

30 July 2000

Editor: I did not realize it when I first wrote this article, but it turns out this subject matter is a bit controversial. In fact, I had one company respond by saying the following

"I talked to some of our evangelists internally and they don't want to comment on this because it's such a sensitive issue to developers. They take the whole Direct3D, OpenGL discussion really seriously and so we're nervous about alienating developers on either side of the issue."

Who knew that a simple discussion of Vsync could bring out such a response ;-)

Section 1 - The Basics

In theĀ other part of this series, we took a look at What does 'Optimal' Refresh Rate really mean? While that discussion focused on the 2D side of things, refresh rate also plays an important part in the 3D world...in the form of VSYNC. But what is VSYNC?

Well before we can answer that, a little discussion of how 3D works is required. In order to get a smoother transition between frames in 3D games, the video card puts the contents of the upcoming frame into its frame buffer. [The frame buffer is part of the local memory that resides on the video card itself] It then moves the contents of the frame buffer to the screen. When this is complete, the frame buffer gets the next frame. This process repeats its self over and over.

Now, what is VSYNC? Well, VSYNC is basically the synchronizing of buffer swaps with your monitor's refresh rate. With VSYNC enabled, frame rates will not exceed the monitor's current refresh rate for that particular resolution. For example, if your monitor is using a refresh rate of 85Hz at 800x600, with VSYNC enabled, you will theoretically never exceed 85fps. So the refresh rate creates an artificial barrier that limits the frame rate.

So what happens if you are playing on an older monitor that only supports a 60Hz refresh rate. Will you have to live with a maximum of 60fps (assuming that your system can generate more fps)? Not necessarily. Newer video cards give you the option of disabling VSYNC. What happens is that this allows the buffer swapping to occur without synchronizing with the monitor's refresh rate. If it really was the refresh rate limiting you, disabling VSYNC may allow you to obtain frame rates in excess of 60fps. This, unfortunately, can also cause what are called 'visual anomalies': image tearing and flashing polygons. Some games run fine with VSYNC enabled, while other games crumble when VSYNC is disabled.

If you look in Display Properties, you may see an option to disable VSYNC in OpenGL by not Direct3D. Why is this? Well, in order to receive Microsoft's WHQL certification, this option cannot be available. Microsoft does not want Direct3D games to be played without VSYNC.

In the next section, the difference between Direct3D and OpenGL is explored from a developers viewpoint.

Section 2 - The Developer's View

After playing around with a lot of games, I noticed that Vsync anomalies appeared more common in Direct3D games than they did in OpenGL. But why? What would make OpenGL different from Direct3D in that respect? I fired off an email to Jake Simpson, Lead Programmer - PSX2 project for Raven Software (makers of Soldier of Fortune) asking him just that. He was kind enough to take a few minutes and respond.

DS: Is there something different about how OpenGL handles Vsync than Direct3D?

JS: "There is no Vsync in OpenGL as a command. Most apps use the GLFlush command, sometimes followed by a GLFinish command. The GLFlush command basically says "Ok, what ever commands you have in your buffer, send 'em to the rendering device now, and get it working." It doesn't care where the raster is in the drawing sync, it just goes out and does it. The GLFinish command will then make the app wait until the rendering device has completed all the commands it has been sent up til then. This gives you the fastest feedback, fairly obviously. Now, depending on whether you are double buffering your video displays (ie rendering to the back one while the front one is being displayed) you might want to use a swapbuffers command. This means that you can afford to slap out commands to the rendering device when ever you feel like it, since it's always going to be rendering to an unseen buffer. The SwapBuffers command does what it says, it swaps the buffers between the front and the back. When it actually does this, ie at Vsync or just randomly whenever it can depends on the card you are using. Sometimes you can set the 'wait for Vsync' in the properties dialog for your card, sometimes it has to be set via registry options. It's messy and highly card dependant. Obviously working in a window you don't get any kind of Vsyncing going on."

DS: It almost seems like the Quake 2 and Quake 3 engines beg for Vsync to be disabled. Does this go back to question #1 or has John Carmack done something to sidestep the issue?

JS: "As for Quake II & III - John C. makes the game run the fastest he can. Obviously waiting for Vsync before window swapping can cause a slow down. If you take 1.1 frames to draw a scene, then wait for Vsync before swapping frame buffers that means that .9 of that frame is spent doing nothing on the card. The OpenGL context can accept commands and buffer them up, but it's not going to be doing any rendering until the buffers are swapped and the back buffer is unlocked for rendering again. You can see why this would slow the game down."

I spoke to Tim Sweeney, from Epic Games, to get a prospective of the Direct3D side. However his response, while not technical in nature, really got at the heart of the matter.

"I don't have any clue why someone would disable VSync for gameplay. The only legit reason for this is to benchmark 3D card performance without the monitor's refresh rate skewing the results. Regarding a 'philosophical VSync difference between Direct3D and OpenGL', that's nutty. There is no visual benefit to having a game render more frames per second than your monitor is displaying."

Finally, Paul Bonnette from MadOnion (the 3D Mark 2000 people) added to Tim's comments.

"Although I would agree that there are no actual 'visual' benefits to disabling vsync (in fact tearing can make things look pretty god-awful), the ability to squeeze a couple more frames per second is a tweak I used quite often when playing graphically intensive games on lower performance systems. Was there tearing...damned right! Did it speed up the games? Sure did, but when you're getting 15-20fps in your favorite game, anything is an improvement, and the odd graphic glitch is a worthwhile tradeoff!"

Bottom line - you can benchmark with Vsync disabled to test the peak performance of the video card. However, to get the most immersive gaming experience, leave Vsync enabled.

Back to the News

 
      Posted by: , July 30, 2000, 6:00 pm  

 
    Cool banner #1
 
 
       ::  USB News

       ::  Bjorn 3D

       ::  [H]ardOCP

       ::  BurnOutPC

       ::  I am Not a Geek

 
 
Top Products


Processors

AMD

Intel

More...


Cases

Antec

Enlight

More...


Motherboards

Abit

Asus

Tyan

More...


Sound Cards

Creative Labs

Hercules

More...


Graphic Cards

ATI

nVidia

More...


Hard Drives

IBM

Maxtor

Quantum

More...


 

 

 
2001 - 2004 Digital Silence
Digital Silence is not responsible for the information or the accuracy of the information above.
All trademarks and copyrights owned by their respective companies.

Graphical Design by Mohsin Ali
Website Layout by Universal Interactive

PHP Programming by Network Innovations
Additional HTML Programming by Moddin.Net