[AMD] World's First Shipping FreeSync-Enabled Displays (CES)

[Black Octagon]

Acer is known to use AUO panels and the only panel fitting the sepcs is the M270DAN02.3. As I see it, we don't really need a confirmation in this case.

I agree. THe problem is that this panel is only rated by AUO as having a 12ms GTG response time. To get such a panel down to 4-5ms, Acer (and ASUS) would have to use waaaay too much overdrive and lead to overshoot / inverse ghosting. A true 120Hz refresh rate, and response times just fast enough to keep up with this refresh rate. But, in reality, a horrible image. This is my current fear.

Which is why I wonder, is it possible that there is another IPS (or IPS-like) panel out there that has recently been developed, and has 'true' response times in the 4-5ms range???

 

[Pantalaimon]

As far as I know, AHVA is just AUO's variant of IPS

I understand that the IPS name is owned and panels are made by LG, so other panels that have the same characteristics are called AHVA (AUO) or PLS (Samsung?) instead.

 

[Kenmitch]

Why should I google it? I own it and know it doesn't overheat. Some people had issues w/their displays and that was one theory by forum posters (I was one of them on OCN) but it was never substantiated. I live in the hot Arizona desert and mine hasn't come close to overheating. That's why I told you to post proof rather than spreading FUD.



My preference for NVIDIA graphics cards has nothing to do with it. I've stated already that I think NVIDIA should support Async but realistically I don't see that happening because they've invested 2 years + who knows how much money into G-Sync. To capitulate would mean they lost to AMD and I really don't see that happening, standards or not.

What....The NVIDIA market team could run with it don't ya think. They could even spin it as G-Sync 2 if need be. Or just the only gpu that supports both.

I'm running a gtx 970 currently but haven't drank the koolaid!

I kind of regret buying the 970 when reading all the pro NVIDIA vs doom and gloom AMD comments.... Kind of makes me feel like I sold out to the man!

As already brought up current G-Sync offerings look to be overpriced and lacking.

I might be a oddball current NVIDIA user possibly. I'm hoping AMD brings on the heat all ways possible as its best for the consumer.

 

[dacostafilipe]

Quite possible. But the faster panels used for the 144hz version and the ~90$ price delta basicly means the implementation cost is the same for the enduser.

It's the same panel. If they don't run it at 144hz it's only because they don't want to.

Which is why I wonder, is it possible that there is another IPS (or IPS-like) panel out there that has recently been developed, and has 'true' response times in the 4-5ms range???

Maybe. But my money is on it being the same panel.

 

[ShintaiDK]

It's the same panel. If they don't run it at 144hz it's only because they don't want to.

The panels are not native 144hz or even 120hz are they? I assume some panels fails the overdrive to 144hz and even 120hz.

 

[Black Octagon]

Maybe. But my money is on it being the same panel.

Oh me too. But then the problem is that we NEED proper response time measurements, plus PixPerAn screenshots, from someone like TFTCentral. Hoping professional reviews are not too far off

 

[Skurge]

The panels are not native 144hz or even 120hz are they? I assume some panels fails the overdrive to 144hz and even 120hz.

If I remember correctly Asus say they are trying to certify the monitor for 144hz before it goes on sale. I can't remember where I read that though. I will look for the link.

 

[dacostafilipe]

The panels are not native 144hz or even 120hz are they? I assume some panels fails the overdrive to 144hz and even 120hz.

Native 144hz

 

[3DVagabond]

Until things change, if they do at all, if you get a Freesync monitor, you are a slave to AMD.

I'm personally just waiting to see which direction I'll go. AMD does look to have some promising options coming. It is wise to take a wait and see approach. I'm due for a GPU upgrade as well, which is going to make the next GPU generation part of my decision.

Unless nVidia just isn't capable of supporting it, which might be the case currently, they will in the future. It's an open standard. Everyone will support it. They'll just call it something else.

It is their choice, like it or not. There are only 2 high end GPU choices, so if they don't support it, it leaves everyone in the same boat regardless of the brand you use. It'll likely take a noticeable loss in sales for them to give up on their own G-sync modules.

At least nVidia can support it. G-sync? They've made that specific to their brand. AMD and Intel are locked out. How can that be a good thing for you and I?

 

[3DVagabond]

There's a chance? Based on what, your crystal ball? Stop posting misleading statements. Nobody besides AMD uses adaptive sync/free sync and those are the facts.

Why are you even bothering with this? You should be over on the Geforce forums asking why nVidia isn't going to support this. There's absolutely no good reason from a consumer's POV that it's a good thing. Besides, if you really feel being vendor locked is such a bad thing why buy a G-sync monitor? nVidia has said that you have to use one of their cards to take advantage of the feature straight out.

 

[96Firebird]

It's an open standard. Everyone will support it.

No... Just no.

 

[bystander36]

Unless nVidia just isn't capable of supporting it, which might be the case currently, they will in the future. It's an open standard. Everyone will support it. They'll just call it something else.

Just because a standard is open does not mean it has to be supported.

It might, but it might not be supported. Only time will tell. At this time, Nvidia has said they aren't supporting it.

 

[bystander36]

At least nVidia can support it. G-sync? They've made that specific to their brand. AMD and Intel are locked out. How can that be a good thing for you and I?

What does the discussion have to do with what is good for you and me. This isn't about what I want. This is a discussion about what is and will be. Or rather, what "could" be. We do not know what will be until it happens.

Just because someone is open to the possible out comes, good and negative, does not mean they support any particular outcome. I'd rather A-sync be fully supported by everyone, but I recognize that this might not happen, and even if it is, it might be a few years.

 

[Erenhardt]

Any word on cheap 1080p panels with freesync (async).

Believe it or not I payed <100$ last year for my 1080p display. Would mind upgrading for something around that budged - maybe little more.

600$ sounds like a joke for me. Its more expensive than a freaking Oculus rift! - yes, I know those are two different things, but rift as a more advanced device should be more expensive, shouldn't it?

 

[tential]

Any word on cheap 1080p panels with freesync (async).

Believe it or not I payed <100$ last year for my 1080p display. Would mind upgrading for something around that budged - maybe little more.

600$ sounds like a joke for me. Its more expensive than a freaking Oculus rift! - yes, I know those are two different things, but rift as a more advanced device should be more expensive, shouldn't it?

Ya, I think a R9 390x+1080p freesync display might be around that $175 range. It's a little above your budget, but I think it'll be worth it...
/trollface...

 

[Creig]

What does the discussion have to do with what is good for you and me. This isn't about what I want. This is a discussion about what is and will be. Or rather, what "could" be. We do not know what will be until it happens.

It most definitely is about what you and I want. We are the ones who decide whether a products succeeds. If we choose not to purchase a certain product, that product has no future.

 

[bystander36]

It most definitely is about what you and I want. We are the ones who decide whether a products succeeds. If we choose not to purchase a certain product, that product has no future.

Oh, so this like a magic genie thing? I can rub my PC, and make A-sync work for it? Do you seriously believe if you want A-sync to cause G-sync to fail, it will? Don't be naive.

You can't predict what others are going to do with certainty.

What happens is out of your control. It is out of my control. I might have a tiny, itty, little bit of sway if I purchase either monitor choice, but I'm one of billions.

 

[RussianSensation]

It most definitely is about what you and I want. We are the ones who decide whether a products succeeds. If we choose not to purchase a certain product, that product has no future.

Bingo. There is no magic wand/luck that will ensure that GSync or FreeSync succeeds. We make either/both succeed. By buying a G-Sync monitor, a PC gamer sends a market signal that they support closed proprietary standard invented by NV. By buying a FreeSync monitor, a PC gamer is making a conscious choice to send a signal that they want to support open standards instead, are are against vendor lock in. Buying the latter will put significant pressure on Intel and NV to adopt FreeSync, thus potentially making it THE industry standard. Buying the former changes nothing about the current situation and forces gamers to choose a GPU+monitor pairing for the entire ownership life of the monitor, in turn destroying the flexibility of component choices that PCs are so famous for. Since so many NV users only buy NV, they aren't seeing 2 steps ahead of them of how damaging supporting GSync actually is for 80% of the market (AMD & Intel gamers).

GSync vs. FreeSync segregation is one of the worst things that could have happened to PC gaming. This is nothing at all like HD DVD vs. BluRay or VHS vs. BetaMax because in those scenarios there was no segregation as the entire market equally benefited from a unified standard. Think about closed proprietary features like Mantle and PhysX. They work OK short-term but long-term they have little chance to succeed since they alienate some part of the market. At least in Mantle's case AMD gives a choice of open standards such as OpenCL, OpenGL, DX and/or proprietary Mantle. AMD never forces you to only use Mantle on their cards. If you don't like Mantle, you don't have to use it in games. AMD could have just as easily developed its own proprietary "FreeSync module" and segregated Intel and NV GPUs but they didn't.

In NV's case, they are trying to force the customer to pay for what the open standard does for less $ & with less complexity, while at the same time alienating all AMD and Intel GPU users. It's pretty obvious what NV is trying to do -- they want to lock you into their ecosystem so you keep buying their products for the entire duration of the ownership life of your monitor. It's similar in a way to a customer buying the razor or printer, and then being locked into buying the razor blades/ink for that brand (except NV isn't using loss leader strategy for the GSync module in this case -- they are actually making 2 separate profit streams from the GPU sale and the GSync module).

AMD isn't stopping Intel or NV from adopting FreeSync but NV is artificially blocking FreeSync on its GPUs since without locking you into their ecosystem with GSync, they have a lot less control over your GPU upgrade path down the line. Isn't it obvious why NV is reluctant to adopt FreeSync?

Sooner or later next gen GPUs will have DisplayPort 1.3, which by virtue of being beyond DP 1.2a+ will support FreeSync. What's going to be NV's explanation why their DP1.3 capable GPUs don't support FreeSync? :hmm:

There are other benefits of having a unified A-Sync standard. It will reduce consumer confusion and ensure every single future GPU owner/upgrade will benefit from some bare minimum A-Sync feature.

 

[5150Joker]

Oh stop with the melodrama. The world will keep spinning just fine if consumers like me choose to support Gsync. In fact, it tells nvidia that I'm rewarding their hard work and innovation. After all, like usual, amd followed in their footsteps with freesync. I like how some are trying to lump Intel igfx as relevant to the gaming market, what a joke. Fact is free sync has still yet to be reviewed thoroughly like Gsync so we don't know enough about it yet, so why support something nobody outside CES has tested? Lastly Gsync succeeding wouldn't at all change how people play their games. It would just give them an option for a better experience by going with nvidia.

Nvidia has no plans to support free sync, they've made it clear they will only back Gsync. So stop lying to consumers on this forum by telling them otherwise and having them waste their money just to support your agendas.

 

[Black Octagon]

I will wait for professional comparisons of the two technologies. If G-Sync has some clear advantages that FS can't match without a hardware module, I 'may' consider an NV GPU.

However, if FS is as good (or better), I will almost certainly stay with the red team. The only reason I wouldn't is if Pascal/Volta comprehensively smashes Fiji XT, in both the performance and value departments

 

[RussianSensation]

Nvidia has no plans to support free sync, they've made it clear they will only back Gsync. So stop lying to consumers on this forum by telling them otherwise and having them waste their money just to support your agendas.

What exactly am I lying about and what agenda do I have? I am the one that wouldn't have a problem with NV supporting both GSync and FreeSync. You seem to be the one having major issues with FreeSync actually succeeding and thus becoming an industry standard based on how you constantly criticize and cast doubt wrt to it. You've already made it clear you have 0 interest in anything made by AMD, ever, so I don't even understand why FreeSync is of any relevance to you. If GSync wins, you keep buying NV, you lose nothing. If FreeSync wins, NV will support it, and you'll have it. Many of us who are brand agnostic don't want vendor lock in. You seem to have a huge problem with this idea of component pairing flexibility without inherent downsides -- something the PC has always been praised for.

You also didn't talk about how FreeSync could be more easily fitted into laptops since it wouldn't require a cumbersome module with an additional heatsink that would otherwise take up valuable room inside the chassis, nor did you talk about how FreeSync allows one to choose whether we want to enable V-Sync or not outside of the A-Sync frequency range (ie., 30-60Hz).

Your constant desire to dismiss Intel GPUs as worthless for gaming is laughable considering millions of people on the PC are playing Blizzard titles and less demanding PC games on Intel GPUs; hence the death of the sub-$100 dGPU market.

 

[Erenhardt]

Ya, I think a R9 390x+1080p freesync display might be around that $175 range. It's a little above your budget, but I think it'll be worth it...
/trollface...

Jeez... Thanks a million, will dig for myself. Sorry for asking

Not-so-high-end R9 285 supports full freesync, so...
And freesync is best where there is graphics settings for fps trade off. And I mean actual graphics settings visible during normal gameplay (mainstream PC), not stop-motion magnifying glass AA method difference (high-end PC).

 

[5150Joker]

What exactly am I lying about and what agenda do I have? I am the one that wouldn't have a problem with NV supporting both GSync and FreeSync. You seem to be the one having major issues with FreeSync actually succeeding and thus becoming an industry standard based on how you constantly criticize and cast doubt wrt to it. You've already made it clear you have 0 interest in anything made by AMD, ever, so I don't even understand why FreeSync is of any relevance to you. If GSync wins, you have NV, you lose nothing. If FreeSync wins, NV will support it, and you'll have it.

You've already made statements that were never backed up by any credible facts:

1. That ROG G-Sync module overheats and when called out, you said, "Google it".

2. You ignored the fact that the ROG Swift has been tested by professional reviewers and it has matched other good IPS panels in color reproduction and CR (and destroyed them in other important gaming metrics like input lag) but you keep drumming the "inferior TN" bit and posting misleading pictures. You also continue to ignore those like me who have BOTH a high end IPS + ROG Swift saying otherwise. You also gloss over the fact that IPS has some serious inherent flaws like glow that nullify it's viewing angle superiority and that it is a slower technology vs TN and will give a poorer gaming experience.

You keep evangelizing Adaptive Sync and saying it is an open VESA standard and therefore better for the consumer yet you haven't seen either G-Sync or Async in person and know next to nothing about it. And then there are the others in this thread and elsewhere that are outright lying and claiming that Adaptive Sync or a variant will be supported by NVIDIA when this couldn't be further from the truth. NVIDIA has gone on record saying they will solely focus on G-Sync and not support Adaptive Sync yet these same people ignore that fact and try to HOPE that NVIDIA is somehow pressured into supporting a competing standard.

That's why potential customers right now in the market need to know the truth: If you purchase an Adaptive Sync/Free Sync display, you WILL be locked into an AMD GPU for the foreseeable future. NVIDIA is not backing that standard. If you go with NVIDIA, you will be locked into G-Sync. G-Sync is a proven technology that has been reviewed and tested, Adaptive Sync is not.

I'll leave everyone a quote from NVIDIA's Tom Petersen: There is no truth [to that rumor of NVIDIA Adaptive Sync support] and we have made no official comments about Adaptive Sync. One thing I can say is that NVIDIA as a company is 100% dedicated to G-Sync. We are going to continue to invest in G-Sync and it is a way we can make the gaming experience better. We have no need for Adaptive Sync. We have no intention of [implementing it]."

 

[tential]

You've already made statements that were never backed up by any credible facts:

1. That ROG G-Sync module overheats and when called out, you said, "Google it".

2. You ignored the fact that the ROG Swift has been tested by professional reviewers and it has matched other good IPS panels in color reproduction and CR but you keep drumming the "inferior TN" bit and posting misleading pictures. You also continue to ignore those like me who have BOTH a high end IPS + ROG Swift saying otherwise. You also gloss over the fact that IPS has some serious inherent flaws like glow that nullify it's viewing angle superiority and that it is a slower technology vs TN and will give a poorer gaming experience.

You keep evangelizing Adaptive Sync and saying it is an open VESA standard and therefore better for the consumer yet you haven't seen either G-Sync or Async in person and know next to nothing about it. And then there are the others in this thread and elsewhere that are outright lying and claiming that Adaptive Sync or a variant will be supported by NVIDIA when this couldn't be further from the truth. NVIDIA has gone on record saying they will solely focus on G-Sync yet these same people ignore that fact and try to HOPE that NVIDIA is somehow pressured into supporting a competing standard.

That's why potential customers right now in the market need to know the truth: If you purchase an Adaptive Sync/Free Sync display, you WILL be locked into an AMD GPU for the foreseeable future. NVIDIA is not backing that standard. If you go with NVIDIA, you will be locked into G-Sync. G-Sync is a proven technology that has been reviewed and tested, Adaptive Sync is not.

Nvidia Graphics cards owners could just buy a Freesync monitor, then just hope Nvidia supports it....

Ya... you see how ridiculous that sounds?

It's honestly mindboggling how people on here can't understand that Freesync locks them into AMD (and Intel IF intel supports it I don't know why people keep mentioning them but go ahead and enjoy that integrated graphics for gaming. Because that's COMPLETELY relevant to this conversation)

 

[5150Joker]

Nvidia Graphics cards owners could just buy a Freesync monitor, then just hope Nvidia supports it....

Ya... you see how ridiculous that sounds?

It's honestly mindboggling how people on here can't understand that Freesync locks them into AMD (and Intel IF intel supports it I don't know why people keep mentioning them but go ahead and enjoy that integrated graphics for gaming. Because that's COMPLETELY relevant to this conversation)

They know how absurd it is to make those statements and they keep doing it because if you look at their post history, those same people always push AMD regardless of the facts. Backing ASync will not help gamers any more than it would to support a proprietary standard like Gsync because discrete gaming is a two horse race with NVIDIA being the clear leader and AMD being a 25-30% market share minor player. Those of us that back NVIDIA like me have no qualms about admitting it but they can't be honest enough to say the same about their AMD leanings. In fact, when they openly lie to consumers on this forum by making statements like, "Unless nVidia just isn't capable of supporting it, which might be the case currently, they will in the future", it shows they are willing to deceive just to further an agenda which should truthfully earn them infractions for posting misinformation.