[AT]AMD Demonstrates "FreeSync", Free G-Sync Alternative, at CES 2014

[Arkadrel]

We need a more in depth article on this. It seems like we already have a VESA standard that does this. What do we need Gsync for then? Why does nVidia have to use additional hardware that is only compatible with their GPU's?

Because Nvidia marketing is genius, and can thus make unnessary hardware to sell you for profits.

I mean why use standarts that already do stuff, when you can make your own stuff that locks people in and can charge a fortune for it?

I kinda see thunderbolt the same way. Both USB and thunderbolt are already so fast not even SSD's can make use of the speed, whats the point?

Its just a way to lock you in, and charge extra.

Why the heck did they wait so long to implement this? Why does it take Nvidia releasing something to get them off their laurels? And on top of that, why don't they have a bring to market plan in place if it is so great?

Nonetheless, this is interesting.

Yep AMD shoulda done something like this ages ago, if it could.

 

[bystander36]

Because Nvidia marketing is genius, and can thus make unnessary hardware to sell you for profits.

I mean why use standarts that already do stuff, when you can make your own stuff that locks people in and can charge a fortune for it?

I kinda see thunderbolt the same way. Both USB and thunderbolt are already so fast not even SSD's can make use of the speed, whats the point?

Its just a way to lock you in, and charge extra.

We don't know if that is true or not, but I certainly wouldn't take it off the table at this point. It is something Nvidia would do.

There are other reasons they may have used G-sync, instead of a VESA standard. In either case, there would have had to be hardware modifications for it to work. It's quite possible G-sync works better, but we won't know that for a while. It is also possible Nvidia's GPU's didn't support this feature.

And as far as Thunderbolt goes. It does have uses. It's not a use most users need, but it could be great for servers, external GPU's and for simply having the bandwidth ready for when we need it.

 

[wand3r3r]

This thread is full of fail.

The same huge proponents of GSync, none of whom have ever seen it in real life yet lined up to praise it like the new gift to humanity, sit here and nitpick on the companies shortfalls. GSync was so awesome because it would remove tearing ..(other point).., but freesync is not awesome because AMD ... (insert bs).


Rather than discuss the remote possibility that this could come to fruition, it's met with negativity and FUD. Apparently it's automatically a failure since team red demonstrated it.

My opinion on freesync? I hope it succeeds, simply because it's free and as a consumer I win. My thought on this is that I would like to maintain > 60 FPS and not have the issue, but it could be very good (both gsync/freesync) since FPS drops are horrible.

 

[bystander36]

This thread is full of fail.

The same huge proponents of GSync, none of whom have ever seen it in real life yet lined up to praise it like the new gift to humanity, sit here and nitpick on the companies shortfalls. GSync was so awesome because it would remove tearing ..(other point).., but freesync is not awesome because AMD ... (insert bs).


Rather than discuss the remote possibility that this could come to fruition, it's met with negativity and FUD. Apparently it's automatically a failure since team red demonstrated it.

My opinion on freesync? I hope it succeeds, simply because it's free and as a consumer I win. My thought on this is that I would like to maintain > 60 FPS and not have the issue, but it could be very good (both gsync/freesync) since FPS drops are horrible.

I support G-sync, I hope this succeeds.

That doesn't change that we don't know enough about this yet.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

This thread is full of fail.

Yes it is, but not because of what you posted but because ignorant people who dismissed G-Sync because Nvidia think FreeSync is actually the same thing.

It's not, we know very little about the "sneaky little snarf" demo, however we do know it uses V-Sync, which means input lag. And by extension means it's not the same as G-Sync.

Ironic really, given how dismissive the same group who have no idea what they're talking about now are so excited because they've allowed themselves to believe AMD has the same tech.

 

[Sequences]

Wow, some people are reading a bit too much into a demonstration at a tech show. I think its great that AMD can demonstrate these things. This might be a side-project for them to keep an eye on sync-related technology. If it kicks off something big, maybe they will try to leverage open standards to keep it going.

 

[wand3r3r]

Yes it is, but not because of what you posted but because ignorant people who dismissed G-Sync because Nvidia think FreeSync is actually the same thing.

It's not, we know very little about the "sneaky little snarf" demo, however we do know it uses V-Sync, which means input lag. And by extension means it's not the same as G-Sync.

Ironic really, given how dismissive the same group who have no idea what they're talking about now are so excited because they've allowed themselves to believe AMD has the same tech.

When NV demos do you call it a sneaky little anything? Even the wording is like negative marketing speak.

It was a demo and who kows if it's coming or not. If it's free and removes e.g. tearing which was one of the bigger benefits of GSync iirc, why hate on it since it's not the "same" as Gsync?

Obviously if there are people against Gsync because NV, that's as biased as the people are against Freesync because AMD. I haven't hardly followed the NV Gsync thread since I am not going to drop $100-300 on it. I didn't notice the people in there against it flipping in here. People like free so I'm not surprised if people are interested in this yet not excited about an exclusive and expensive NV feature. I did notice the major proponents of (anything) NV in here spreading FUD about this demo.

 

[blackened23]

Nobody is against Freesync because AMD. Personally I hope it happens. But if you look at their history of their claims and how that lined up with reality, a trend emerges. That trend being AMD promises one thing , but it never happens.

Who WOULDNT want this to work? I mean. It could work on HDTVs. It could work for mobile. That would be great. At the same time, I think it's hilarious that some think it is *that* simple as to just use variable vblank. Nvidia would not add FPGA just for the heck of it. There's a reason for it. In fact, the article itself states that AMD has no idea when it will come to market. If it will come to market. They do not have plans to make it into a workable product yet. And the fact of the matter is, desktop panels don't support variable vblank by and large. Does this give you the warm fuzzies? You said it yourself.

who kows if it's coming or not.

There you go. You know g-sync is coming. WHO KNOWS IF FREESYNC is coming or not. Thanks for summarizing the situation. If AMD makes it happen, hey great. History is working against you, though. Historically AMD has always been full of crap, essentially, so I don't have much hope of freesync happening. ESPECIALLY when the article itself STATES that they don't have any plans to turn this into an actual product. Sounds like more proof of concept marketing nonsense. I hope i'm wrong though.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

When NV demos do you call it a sneaky little anything? Even the wording is like negative marketing speak.

It was a demo and who kows if it's coming or not. If it's free and removes e.g. tearing which was one of the bigger benefits of GSync iirc, why hate on it since it's not the "same" as Gsync?

Obviously if there are people against Gsync because NV, that's as biased as the people are against Freesync because AMD. I haven't hardly followed the NV Gsync thread since I am not going to drop $100-300 on it. I didn't notice the people in there against it flipping in here. People like free so I'm not surprised if people are interested in this yet not excited about an exclusive and expensive NV feature. I did notice the major proponents of (anything) NV in here spreading FUD about this demo.

You're saying Nvidia unveiling of G-Sync is similar to AMDs lemon-aid stand demonstration?

I'm not hating on it because it's not the same as G-Sync, I'm simply stating it's not the same thing as G-Sync, and therefore by extension it isn't G-Sync for free.

This is basically similar to Triple Buffering in the way AMD presented it to be used on Desktops. Or basically everything G-Sync tries to get away from.

 

[bystander36]

Currently, we have very little info on this Freesync. We know that it works on 2 mobile devices, and it is tech they were working on to conserve energy on mobile devices. We also know they are using a VESA standard VBlanking to do it.

That is all we have heard.

G-sync has been far more detailed and demonstrated. You can even buy them now.

So no, we can't assume much about Freesync yet.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

I would wager that the add in board for gsync is to get the backlight to strobe in sync with the refresh rate. We know that monitors can have custom refresh rates already. To the best of my knowledge none of them have custom strobing speed. It's only at 120 hz that strobing is allowed I believe. Could that be the reason for the add in module?

 

[f1sherman]

I love free goodies. Hate empty promises.

Can AMD make something out of (almost) nothing? (Open standard that existed for ages)
I think so, otherwise why bother?
Best of all: It will be FREE. Poor mans G-Sync, sure I'll take one.

EDIT: Ewww... now I realize this requires panel support.

 

[bystander36]

I would wager that the add in board for gsync is to get the backlight to strobe in sync with the refresh rate. We know that monitors can have custom refresh rates already. To the best of my knowledge none of them have custom strobing speed. It's only at 120 hz that strobing is allowed I believe. Could that be the reason for the add in module?

G-sync does have two parts, the Lightboost sequel, and the variable scaler. That's what they've said at least.

 

[antihelten]

We should be able to use a program like Monitor Asset Manager to verify what our monitors support. I'm not at home right now, but I'm going to fire it up and see what's what in a little bit from now.

http://www.entechtaiwan.com/util/moninfo.shtm

I did a bit of digging around and as far as I can tell the VESA vblank standard in question might be the Coordinated Video Timings (CVT) standard from 2003 (last updated in 2013)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinated_Video_Timings

This is the only standard that mentions vblank (that I could find), and it also includes reduced blanking (which by definition requires manipulating vblank). Also the timeline (2003) would fit with AMD allegedly supporting the standard for several generations.

So using the program you posted I tried to check my own monitor (a lenovo thinkpad laptop):

Some of the installed EDIDs included the line "CVT standard............. Not supported", and some of them (including the default one) didn't. I don't know if the lack of the above line implies that the standard is supported, but I couldnt find any EDID that said "CVT standard............. Supported", so I guess there's a decent chance that that is the case.

 

[bystander36]

I did a bit of digging around and as far as I can tell the VESA vblank standard in question might be the Coordinated Video Timings (CVT) standard from 2003 (last updated in 2013)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinated_Video_Timings

This is the only standard that mentions vblank (that I could find), and it also includes reduced blanking (which by definition requires manipulating vblank). Also the timeline (2003) would fit with AMD allegedly supporting the standard for several generations.

So using the program you posted I tried to check my own monitor (a lenovo thinkpad laptop):

Some of the installed EDIDs included the line "CVT standard............. Not supported", and some of them (including the default one) didn't. I don't know if the lack of the above line implies that the standard is supported, but I couldnt find any EDID that said "CVT standard............. Supported", so I guess there's a decent chance that that is the case.

I had checked mine, it also doesn't support the CVT standard.

 

[Venomous]

Time to clean this forum up by issuing bans. You can't have one decent conversation at this forum any longer and that's pretty pathetic.

Neither technology sucks... As long as input lag , tearing and frame stability comes out of it , I could care less. Gsync will most likely be hacked to work on AMD cards just like lightboost was.

 

[Silverforce11]

I hope i'm wrong though.

You have a habit of going on a tirade against everything AMD... then ending your posts with "I hope i'm wrong though."

It is a very strange habit to have!

One could be mistaken to think AMD burnt down your house, killed your puppy and gave you a bad hair day.

Again, all I see here is a tech demo.. shown at a tech show.. it works, the rest, we shall see. Why all the hate?!

 

[blackened23]

Pretty simple. If AMD's version works as purported, it would have a wide variety of uses outside of PC gaming. That would be a great thing. Just think. TVs? Mobile? Tablets? Etc. That's why I HOPE i'm wrong.

Oh the other hand, I don't think it's as simple as AMD states. I have a hard time believing that nvidia would throw in a logic board for no reason, you know? If it were as simple as "flipping a switch" with DP, why wasn't it done 5 years ago? Also, I don't entirely have confidence in AMD delivering for reasons I've already outlined. The AT article doesn't exactly instill confidence in that respect either. I won't get into all that again. But that's the answer to your question.

 

[Teizo]

What part of his post was wrong?

Clearly stated that AMD has no bring to market plans. If so, what the heck are they doing showing this off? Just trying to distract people away from GSync with fluff?

I hope there is something to this, but not sure why they are being so coy about it. If it's free...release it already. I for one, would love it.

 

[antihelten]

I had checked mine, it also doesn't support the CVT standard.

Does it say it doesn't support it in the default EDID or do you simply don't have the line though?

According to this site: http://www.playtool.com/pages/dvicompat/dvi.html*, most monitors built after 2004 should support CVT. Also interestingly it mentions that some older Nvidia cards had problems with their DVI transmitter. This might have something to do with the previously mentioned speculation, about Nvidia cards not supporting the standard, being the reason behind them creating the hardware solution GSYNC.

*I have no idea if the site is accurate or not

What part of his post was wrong?

Clearly stated that AMD has no bring to market plans. If so, what the heck are they doing showing this off? Just trying to distract people away from GSync with fluff?

I hope there is something to this, but not sure why they are being so coy about it. If it's free...release it already. I for one, would love it.

Technically they wouldn't really need much of a plan if it's just a question of implementing it in the drivers. It would simply be a question of doing the programming and QC, and then including it in their next driver update (although things are off course never that simple). I mean I don't think they had any public go to market strategy with their recent microstutter fix either, they simply just released it when it was ready.

 

[3DVagabond]

What part of his post was wrong?

Clearly stated that AMD has no bring to market plans. If so, what the heck are they doing showing this off? Just trying to distract people away from GSync with fluff?

I hope there is something to this, but not sure why they are being so coy about it. If it's free...release it already. I for one, would love it.

It looks like they need to adapt a tech that's designed for power saving in portable devices to desktop use for gaming. Might not be as simple as adding the access in CCC. They've likely only been looking at this since Gsync was announced. Things usually take longer than that to get from inception to retail.

 

[Despoiler]

I did a bit of digging around and as far as I can tell the VESA vblank standard in question might be the Coordinated Video Timings (CVT) standard from 2003 (last updated in 2013)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinated_Video_Timings

This is the only standard that mentions vblank (that I could find), and it also includes reduced blanking (which by definition requires manipulating vblank). Also the timeline (2003) would fit with AMD allegedly supporting the standard for several generations.

So using the program you posted I tried to check my own monitor (a lenovo thinkpad laptop):

Some of the installed EDIDs included the line "CVT standard............. Not supported", and some of them (including the default one) didn't. I don't know if the lack of the above line implies that the standard is supported, but I couldnt find any EDID that said "CVT standard............. Supported", so I guess there's a decent chance that that is the case.

I'm an idiot. I completely forgot that Nvidia's G-Sync requires displayport because it supports VESA vblank. Anything displayport should be good to go. Other connectors...not sure.

http://www.vesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/ICCE-Presentation-on-VESA-DisplayPort.pdf

 

[VulgarDisplay]

I swear no one can read. It said they don't have "public" plans to release anything. Not having public release dates and partners is 100% the same as any nda'd release we sit around and wait for on tech sites. One day before the 780ti announcement nvidia didn't have any public plans to release a new GPU. After they announced it they had public plans to release.

I swear people are being intentionally illiterate to support their views.

 

[f1sherman]

They also said they have huge cloud gaming / gamestreaming ambitions. One day after NV came with their announcement. What happened with it?

This feels like a similar knee jerk reaction. Does this means NV patent locked their solution?

I mean no way, no way in hell, NV engies have missed equally good software solution.

 

[blackened23]

From the outset, when g-sync was announced, everything was laid out in terms of plans to market:

Panel vendors.
Release date.
Partners.
Potential cost.
Benefits.
Tech site previews.

In fact you can buy g-sync panels NOW.

Meanwhile AMD has:

Nothing.


What they said:

"We have no plans to product-ize this"
"We don't have a go to market strategy"

If someone doesn't see a difference between this and how g-sync was announced, one would have to be freaking blind. This all goes back to the fact that Nvidia is going to deliver on g-sync. G-sync is about to hit the ground running. Now. Q1 2014. Free-sync? I wouldn't get my hopes up. Sounds like marketing proof of concept and nothing more.