AMD Freesync Monitors & Reviews Thread

[Elfear]

Finally some news about the 34" Acer Predator. OCUK is saying there is a G-sync AND FreeSync version. 34", 3440x1440, curved, IPS, and will be out in the July/August timeframe. :wub:

Only downside is £899/£999 for the FreeSync/G-sync models respectively. Bit spendy but just what I've been waiting for.

 

[3DVagabond]

Finally some news about the 34" Acer Predator. OCUK is saying there is a G-sync AND FreeSync version. 34", 3440x1440, curved, IPS, and will be out in the July/August timeframe. :wub:

Only downside is £899/£999 for the FreeSync/G-sync models respectively. Bit spendy but just what I've been waiting for.

The only problems I have with the 34" units I've seen reviewed so far is 1) High input lag and 2) unevenness across the display. The corners suffer from BLB, lower contrast, etc...

 

[biostud]

Personally I would rather have a 32" 2560x1440 with freesync.

 

[Elfear]

The only problems I have with the 34" units I've seen reviewed so far is 1) High input lag and 2) unevenness across the display. The corners suffer from BLB, lower contrast, etc...

Those can be problems with some of the models. I had the LG UM95 for a month and I didn't have any problems with input lag (although it is measurably higher than the ROG Swift) or screen uniformity. I'm really hoping Acer does a good job in both departments.

 

[xthetenth]

Those can be problems with some of the models. I had the LG UM95 for a month and I didn't have any problems with input lag (although it is measurably higher than the ROG Swift) or screen uniformity. I'm really hoping Acer does a good job in both departments.

My UM95 is perfectly uniform too, which is making me really look forward to the Acer, and hope it's similarly excellent.

It's going to hurt giving up the LG window management software, but the gaming will hopefully be worth it.

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

Here's TFTCentral's XL2730Z review:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/benq_xl2730z.htm

Here's a particularly disturbing part. I take this to mean that right now, it's a choice between the best input lag, or freesync, can't have both. GPU driver updates are downloadable but how do monitors typically get firmware updates? Given this, is it advisable to either shell out for a ROG Swift and gsync GPU, or commit to waiting for XL2730Z models to ship with the fix they talk about below?

From a monitor point of view the use of FreeSync creates a problem at the moment on the XL2730Z at the moment. The issue is that the AMA setting does nothing when you connect the screen over DisplayPort to a FreeSync system. This applies whether you are actually using FreeSync or not, you don't even need to have the option ticked in the graphics card settings for the problem to occur. As a result, the setting appears to be in the off state, and changing it to High or Premium in the menu makes no difference to real-World response times or performance. As a result, response times are fairly slow at ~8.5ms G2G and there is a more noticeable blur to the moving image. See the more detailed response time tests in the previous sections for more information, but needless to say this is not the optimum AMA (response time) setting on this screen. For some reason, the combination of FreeSync support and this display disables the AMA function.

This only happens when you are using a FreeSync enabled graphics card, FreeSync capable drivers and the DisplayPort interface. If you switch to DVI or any other interface (which don't support the FreeSync feature) even from the same graphics card/driver then AMA behaves as it should again. If you use DisplayPort but revert to an older non-FreeSync enabled driver package then AMA works as it should. If you use a non-FreeSync supporting AMD card, or a card from NVIDIA/Intel then AMA functions as it should. It's only when all 3 things are combined that the problem seems to occur. Obviously if you eliminate one of them to make AMA work properly, you lose the advantage of FreeSync dynamic refresh rate control. The only exception is if you enable the Blur Reduction mode, where the AMA function then works properly regardless of your system configuration.

Having spoken to BenQ about it the issue is a known bug which apparently currently affects all FreeSync monitors. The AMD FreeSync command disturbs the response time (AMA) function, causing it to switch off. It's something which will require an update from AMD to their driver behaviour, which they are currently working on. It will also require a firmware update for the screen itself to correct the problem. Both are being worked on and we will aim to update this review when it is fixed, hopefully within a couple of weeks. Assuming that fixes the issue the performance when using a FreeSync system should be much better than now, as you can move from AMA Off to the better AMA High setting. At the moment if you use the FreeSync function, or even just have a FreeSync enabled system in place, the response times are slower than they should be by a fair amount, and so you will experience a moderate amount of blur. If you need to, you can always switch to DVI or another interface other than DisplayPort to benefit from the AMA setting (but lose FreeSync).

It is unclear at the moment what would be required to update an existing XL2730Z model, and what would be required in terms of new firmware. We will update this review section when we know more.

 

[mutantmagnet]

To update a monitor's firmware you have to send it back to the manufacturer.

 

[crisium]

I take this to mean that right now, it's a choice between the best input lag, or freesync, can't have both.

Hold it! Motion blur is not input lag. Response time is not input lag. I want to be clear, does Free Sync hurt motion blur or input lag?

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

Hold it! Motion blur is not input lag. Response time is not input lag. I want to be clear, does Free Sync hurt motion blur or input lag?

They were saying that there is a bug that causes overdrive to not work while Freesync is active. And since overdrive is part of the input lag reduction it causes increased lag until they fix it, but that it will require both a monitor firmware update and a driver update.

I want to get this monitor but sending it back for RMA when they have firmware update would be a pain-

 

[Silverforce11]

"If we take some test photos using the PixPerAn tool you can make some further visual comparisons between the overdrive settings. With AMA off the slower response times lead to some low levels of motion blur. It's not actually a massive amount as even with an 8.5ms G2G response time measured it's about on par with most decent IPS-type panels anyway"

AMA reduces blur by increasing the response time G2G. Input lag? 8ms is equivalent of 120hz already. Much better than 16ms that most gamers play with. No where does that review even mention INPUT lag.

"It should be noted that the real benefits of variable refresh rate technologies really come into play when viewing lower frame rate content, around 40 - 75fps typically delivers the best results compared with Vsync on/off. At consistently higher frame rates as you get nearer to 144 fps the benefits of FreeSync (and G-sync) are not as great, but still apparent. There will be a gradual transition period for each user where the benefits of using FreeSync decrease, and it may instead be better to use the Blur Reduction feature discussed in the following section which is not available when using FreeSync"

This does explain the the increased blur noticed. FS is currently not compatible with blur-reduction technologies in monitors. Which makes it rather pointless for gaming IMO.

 

[Phynaz]

To update a monitor's firmware you have to send it back to the manufacturer.

You've been able to update monitor firmware from your PC for at least a decade.

 

[Elfear]

More info being released by Acer about the 34" Predator. (credit goes to the peeps on OCN for finding the info)

The Acer XR341CKA monitor will be available in North America in September with prices starting at US$1,299, in EMEA in August with prices starting at €1,399, and in China in September with prices starting at ¥8,999. Exact specifications, prices, and availability will vary by region. To find out about availability, product specifications and prices in specific markets, please contact your nearest Acer office or retailer via www.acer.com.

Source

The news release is for the G-Sync version of the monitor but I'm assuming the Freesync version will be almost exactly the same panel. Looks like release will be August or September 🙂\) and cost will be $1,299 so probably $1,099-1,149 for the Freesync version. Rumor has it that it will only be 75hz as well.

 

[Subyman]

Definitely won't be preordering it seeing as the other curved displays are having trouble. Hard to throw down $1200 on 75hz as well. I'll see how it shakes out. Was hoping for 120hz+.

 

[RussianSensation]

The news release is for the G-Sync version of the monitor but I'm assuming the Freesync version will be almost exactly the same panel. Looks like release will be August or September 🙂\) and cost will be $1,299 so probably $1,099-1,149 for the Freesync version. Rumor has it that it will only be 75hz as well.

That monitor looks nice and they used premium materials for the base. However, that pricing looks steep. 34" LG 34UM94-P Ultrawide 3440x1440 IPS LED Monitor is $751 right now. Seems like manufacturers are charging an arm and a leg for FreeSync/GSync. At this pace getting a high quality 32-37" 4K IPS Adaptive Sync monitor for $999 sounds like wishful thinking. The combination of high pricing for 4K monitors, these large premiums for FreeSync/GSync monitors and lack of 30-144Hz FreeSync monitors is really slowing down the pace of adoption imo. I think we really need for Intel to side with FreeSync for adoption to skyrocket. At the current pace it seems the trickling down is painfully slow. I don't know there was so much hype behind 4K because neither GSync nor FreeSync monitor options are targetting this resolution at all. It's as if the monitor manufacturers aren't ready to embrace 4K and as a result, the volume of 4K monitors is low, keeping manufacturing costs high.

One of the reasons I skipped 1600P monitors as because I always felt the PC monitor manufacturers were just artificially keeping prices high. It made no sense to me given all the feature, build quality and screen sizes of LED/Plasma TVs. And here are we seeing a repeat of this with 4K on the PC. When 40" 4K TVs are already sub-$1000, we are getting charged $1000 for 32" 4K monitors without FreeSync/GSync. It's going to get absurd at this pace as TV manufacturers will scale down higher end 4K TVs to lower price levels over the next 3-4 years and we might end up with a situation where a 32" 4K PC monitor costs as much as a 50-60" 4K TV. That's pretty much what happened with 1600P vs. 50-65 inch Plasmas and LEDs which made 1600P PC monitor pricing absurd. This is really disappointing imo.

 

[Subyman]

That monitor looks nice and they used premium materials for the base. However, that pricing looks steep. 34" LG 34UM94-P Ultrawide 3440x1440 IPS LED Monitor is $751 right now. Seems like manufacturers are charging an arm and a leg for FreeSync/GSync. At this pace getting a high quality 32-37" 4K IPS Adaptive Sync monitor for $999 sounds like wishful thinking.

That is why I am disappointed to see these prices. LG has had some decent 21:9 monitors available for quite some time. The only feature keeping me from trying one of those out (even at 60hz) is Freesync/Gsync integration. If I'm throwing down $1000+ for a gaming monitor, it better be 120hz+.

The combination of high pricing for 4K monitors, these large premiums for FreeSync/GSync monitors and lack of 30-144Hz FreeSync monitors is really slowing down the pace of adoption imo. I think we really need for Intel to side with FreeSync for adoption to skyrocket. At the current pace it seems the trickling down is painfully slow. I don't know there was so much hype behind 4K because neither GSync nor FreeSync monitor options are targetting this resolution at all. It's as if the monitor manufacturers aren't ready to embrace 4K and as a result, the volume of 4K monitors is low, keeping manufacturing costs high.

Its hard to pick out a monitor right now. There used to be clear options for upgrading and the only big differentiator was build quality. The list of features that have been piled on top of a monitor purchase now needs a matrix to figure out. I thought the Swift would be the last monitor I would purchase for a few years until they showed off the 34" monitors. I've been on 1440p for years, so I'm ready for something bigger. Sadly, the prices have gotten sky high.

One of the reasons I skipped 1600P monitors as because I always felt the PC monitor manufacturers were just artificially keeping prices high. It made no sense to me given all the feature, build quality and screen sizes of LED/Plasma TVs. And here are we seeing a repeat of this with 4K on the PC. When 40" 4K TVs are already sub-$1000, we are getting charged $1000 for 32" 4K monitors without FreeSync/GSync. It's going to get absurd at this pace as TV manufacturers will scale down higher end 4K TVs to lower price levels over the next 3-4 years and we might end up with a situation where a 32" 4K PC monitor costs as much as a 50-60" 4K TV. That's pretty much what happened with 1600P vs. 50-65 inch Plasmas and LEDs which made 1600P PC monitor pricing absurd. This is really disappointing imo.

I agree. I used a 1680x1050 monitor for nearly five years due to 1600p prices being constantly $1300+. It just didn't seem worth it to me. I find it a bit absurd that I purchased an IPS 1440p 27" monitor nearly 3 years ago for only $280 brand new, but had to drop $700+ to get a TN 1440p 27" monitor a few months ago that would do 144hz and had Gsync.

Now we have to pay double that to get into a 34" monitor with the features to take full advantage of a $300 GPU.

Thinking back, I bought a 55" 1080p plasma TV almost 6 years ago for $650...

I ended up selling the Swift and will wait until I do not have to settle. I'm back to using a normal 1440p 27" Viewsonic. Hopefully someone comes out with a 34" adaptive sync capable display that isn't a cash grab.

 

[xthetenth]

That's basically exactly what I really want out of a monitor with downsides kept to things I'm willing to sacrifice (it's going to take a while to push enough frames to make 75 fps 3440x1440 feel like a huge limitation), but that asking price is steep. Luckily waiting to see what comes of various issues and possibilities with the tech should give me some time to see what happens with the market.

 

[RussianSensation]

I find it a bit absurd that I purchased an IPS 1440p 27" monitor nearly 3 years ago for only $280 brand new, but had to drop $700+ to get a TN 1440p 27" monitor a few months ago that would do 144hz and had Gsync.

For me after taxes and conversion to USD from CDN, the Swift comes out to $900 USD. :whiste: I realize it's not directly comparable due to input lag and panel refresh rate, but 50" 4K Vizio over here sells for $1065 USD.

That TV has a 50" screen and smart TV features! Also, it's not just backlit but has 64 active LED zones adapt to on-screen content by adjusting brightness of the LED backlight! It also has Ethernet port and 802.11ac dual-band WiFi for accessing apps. That's why I feel the PC manufacturers are straight up ripping us off. Imagine if Samsung or LG or Vizio released a 4K TV with FreeSync/GSync, oh wow!

A 55" OLED, with the best IQ of any TV CNET ever tested, is $2350. I realize it's only 1080P, but we are talking OLED with deepest blacks and brightest whites that put any IPS/TN/AVA/PLS panel to shame.

I am hoping my monitor lasts me another 2-3 years before it dies so that 4K and Freesync/GSync have more time to mature. I still feel like even in 2-3 years, we'll be gouged though. As you have noted, 1600P monitors remained > $1000 for years. Maybe the 4K won't live up to the hype for PC gaming for another 5 years and 1440P (2560x1440/3440x1440) will become the next popular resolution? Certainly, I am not seeing much progress in pushing 4K to the mainstream for PC gaming. :'(

 

[sakete]

Just a quick question guys, regardless of whether a monitor has Gsync or Freesync, won't the higher refresh rate (say you get a 144Hz monitor) be beneficial regardless of whether you even use the activesync feature?

Say I wanted to get a Freesync monitor because they're generally cheaper than Gsync, but I'm going to use it with an Nvidia card. Won't the higher refresh rate still be beneficial and result in smoother gameplay and less ghosting?

 

[Kenmitch]

Just a quick question guys, regardless of whether a monitor has Gsync or Freesync, won't the higher refresh rate (say you get a 144Hz monitor) be beneficial regardless of whether you even use the activesync feature?

Say I wanted to get a Freesync monitor because they're generally cheaper than Gsync, but I'm going to use it with an Nvidia card. Won't the higher refresh rate still be beneficial and result in smoother gameplay and less ghosting?

Yes you'd still get the benefits of the 144Hz.

 

[Flapdrol1337]

Just a quick question guys, regardless of whether a monitor has Gsync or Freesync, won't the higher refresh rate (say you get a 144Hz monitor) be beneficial regardless of whether you even use the activesync feature?

Say I wanted to get a Freesync monitor because they're generally cheaper than Gsync, but I'm going to use it with an Nvidia card. Won't the higher refresh rate still be beneficial and result in smoother gameplay and less ghosting?

If you get a high refresh screen with backlight strobing that'll work fine on an nvidia card as well, just can't use the freesync.

On the 27" benq the ghosting is only there if you connect a freesync capable gpu and driver, with a non freesync gpu there are no problems. The screen has overdrive to combat ghosting, just turns off when you enable freesync.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/benq_xl2730z.htm

 

[sakete]

Yes you'd still get the benefits of the 144Hz.

Thanks! That's just what I wanted to hear. I'll probably be going for a Freesync monitor vs. Gsync then, for the following reasons:

- More input ports, not just displayport such as with Gsync
- Built-in scaler so I can use it with different aspect ratios (convenient if you want to attach a playstation/xbox)
- Most of all: cheaper than an equivalent Gsync monitor.

I'm hopeful the new Asus 27" Freesync monitor coming out soon will be good enough. IPS screen with sRGB color space (good enough for my photography stuff after I calibrate it), good viewing angles and still high refresh rate.

And then hopefully the new 300 series from AMD coming out soon will at least be better than the GTX980 so I can get that as well (will be building a new PC this summer).

 

[sakete]

If you get a high refresh screen with backlight strobing that'll work fine on an nvidia card as well, just can't use the freesync.

On the 27" benq the ghosting is only there if you connect a freesync capable gpu and driver, with a non freesync gpu there are no problems. The screen has overdrive to combat ghosting, just turns off when you enable freesync.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/benq_xl2730z.htm

Yeah, just read the review myself. But I definitely don't want a TN panel, hate the viewing angles. Waiting for the Asus screen coming out soon.

And the issue with overdrive being disabled on Freesync seems to be a software issue, so it should be relatively easy to fix.

 

[Flapdrol1337]

And the issue with overdrive being disabled on Freesync seems to be a software issue, so it should be relatively easy to fix.

If it was easy to fix they would've done it already. Hopefully it can be fixed with the driver+firmware update.

 

[sakete]

If it was easy to fix they would've done it already. Hopefully it can be fixed with the driver+firmware update.

Well I did use the word 'relatively', implying that it's easier to fix than if it were a hardware issue. TFT Central already wrote that both AMD and Benq are working on a fix on the driver and firmware side.

 

[xthetenth]

I am hoping my monitor lasts me another 2-3 years before it dies so that 4K and Freesync/GSync have more time to mature. I still feel like even in 2-3 years, we'll be gouged though. As you have noted, 1600P monitors remained > $1000 for years. Maybe the 4K won't live up to the hype for PC gaming for another 5 years and 1440P (2560x1440/3440x1440) will become the next popular resolution? Certainly, I am not seeing much progress in pushing 4K to the mainstream for PC gaming. :'(

I can't help but think that 4K monitors are in a hard place because the performance isn't there yet to drive them without a steep price tag. Hopefully the price tag on the monitors will fall as the price of hitting decent performance on them falls and widens the potential customer base.