From the comments above I am starting to realy worry about PC gamers....
ElPatron said:
I prefer no v-sync. I don't see tearing, but I'd prefer it than capping my awesome number of frames per second.
Disregard anyone who thinks PC gamers are graphics elitists. I'd play in 800x600 just to get smoothness.
Worgen said:
Not usually since it limits my frame rate but occasionally I need it like with Rage, after the latest driver update I get horrible screen tearing unless I turn it on.
'No V-sync for me as it limits the frames per second I get.' Facepalm. You do get that all those frame over 60 fps you are getting are wasted frames right. You are getting 120 or more FPS on your 60hz (60 FPS) LCD monitor. Well that means every one out of two frames that your CPU and GPU are processing, you are not even seeing. The only time you want to un-limit your FPS is if you are doing benchmarking. Otherwise you are just heating up your components processing frames you are never going to see as your monitor is not fast enough to display them.
If the games does not feel smooth with vsync on it's becuase of 'input lag' which is a completely different thing. This can usually be resolved by using triple buffering. One of the worst for this was the dead space games where the in games Vsync gave huge input lag and a limit of 30 fps. Turning off in game vsync and forcing it via the driver or d3doveridder sorted it all out.
People need to get their heads around vsync as it is an important part of PC gaming and if you cannot work this out maybe PC's are not for you.....