[Fudzilla] BenQ and Viewsonic F[r]eeSync monitors in time for holidays

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
U

_UP_

Member
Feb 17, 2013
144
11
81
ShintaiDK said:
It would still only be a benefit for AMD. More Mantle=more useful AMD CPUs plus more Mantle games with Intel as backer.

So the issue may rather be that Mantle is more tired to GCN than told.
Click to expand...

Yeah. You might be right. Don't know. I certainly don't know why they did it, and don't really like it. One of the most important things to me preferring AMD (slightly, have actually had more Nvidia GPUs over the years) is the open standard support, and I have to say that hearing the rumour Intel was interested and was rejected did bother me. Well, won't buy a new GPU until 390X/GM200 so it doesn't matter right now.

On topic, can't wait for a review. Have been planning a new monitor for a while now, and one of these techs would be great. Would prefer a fast response/low lag IPS even though new high end TN panels are not bad saw the Samsung/Asus 4K panel in both flavours and it is definitely not bad. The colours were not far from my Catleap (granted it's not a high end IPS).
 
A

antihelten

Golden Member
Feb 2, 2012
1,764
274
126
ShintaiDK said:
Its not because they dont adapt fast, its because its placed on a CPU and CPUs take a long time to design and validate. Cannonlake for example is already in validation progress and as such a finished design.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it might not be necessary for Intel to do any hardware changes to implement A-SYNC.

Intel already has stuff like PSR and dynamic refresh rate switching, and while these things are currently targeted towards power savings, the underlying hardware might also be able to support A-SYNC. After all A-SYNC appears to have its roots in the variable refresh rate feature of eDP, which is also a power savings feature.

Of course that still doesn't mean that Intel can simply snap their fingers and make it happen, but it could potentially make it a bit easier.
 
ShintaiDK

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
146
106
antihelten said:
To be fair, it might not be necessary for Intel to do any hardware changes to implement A-SYNC.

Intel already has stuff like PSR and dynamic refresh rate switching, and while these things are currently targeted towards power savings, the underlying hardware might also be able to support A-SYNC. After all A-SYNC appears to have its roots in the variable refresh rate feature of eDP, which is also a power savings feature.

Of course that still doesn't mean that Intel can simply snap their fingers and make it happen, but it could potentially make it a bit easier.
Click to expand...

If that was the case, a much larger group of AMDs GPUs should support Freesync, yet they dont.
 
biostud

biostud

Lifer
Feb 27, 2003
19,925
7,036
136
A-sync is the open monitor standard that allows for variable refresh rate, and freesync is how AMD implement that functionality into their products. So nvidia could support a-sync without calling it freesync.
 
D

dacostafilipe

Senior member
Oct 10, 2013
805
309
136
biostud said:
A-sync is the open monitor standard that allows for variable refresh rate, and freesync is how AMD implement that functionality into their products. So nvidia could support a-sync without calling it freesync.
Click to expand...

+1

As far as I understand this, you will be able to control an A-Sync monitor without FreeSync. We could see in a near future, tools like VLC use A-Sync to adapt the refresh rate when playing a movie.

But for gaming or/and dynamic refresh rates, it's more complicated. You need a low latency access to know the actual state of rendering and you may need to trigger a resend of an old frame. That part may require special hardware. It certainly requires a special feature inside the Catalyst Driver, aka FreeSync.

This would also explain why FreeSync "video" does work on all AMD GCN hardware, but FreeSync "gaming" does not.
 
O

ocre

Golden Member
Dec 26, 2008
1,594
7
81
but this also brings in a huge rain cloud when it comes to Intel supporting it....

At least, right off the bat.

It seems extremely unlikely that intel would/can support variable sync on any of their current gen IGPs.

Down the road, perhaps. But there is absolutely no indication whatsoever that intel is coming out with support for desktop A-sync with their current IGP (or future IGPs).

Anyone suggesting this...... is simply making things up out of thin air.
Perhaps in an attempt to artificially pump up the technology.

If or when Intel does speak on the matter, then we should talk about it.
 
P

positivedoppler

Golden Member
Apr 30, 2012
1,148
256
136
I don't see how Intel will not support it. AMD claims that their implementation of A-Sync originated in Laptops due to the need for power saving. For Intel, they have a greater need for power saving than state of the art gaming graphics.
 
9

96Firebird

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 2010
5,742
340
126
positivedoppler said:
I don't see how Intel will not support it. AMD claims that their implementation of A-Sync originated in Laptops due to the need for power saving. For Intel, they have a greater need for power saving than state of the art gaming graphics.
Click to expand...

They already use variable refresh for power savings in laptops. Are you saying they need the same for their desktop iGPUs?
 
C

caswow

Senior member
Sep 18, 2013
525
136
116
96Firebird said:
They already use variable refresh for power savings in laptops. Are you saying they need the same for their desktop iGPUs?
Click to expand...

as long as there is no negative sideffect why wouldnt they use async? its not that async is amds property or patendet by them. its an vesa standard that can be used by everybody...
why are certain people against an industry standard? what is wrong with you guys
 
9

96Firebird

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 2010
5,742
340
126
caswow said:
as long as there is no negative sideffect why wouldnt they use async?
Click to expand...

Maybe it isn't compatible with their hardware right now? Why doesn't it work with all of AMD's previous GCN cards?

And who here is against this industry standard?
 
Last edited:
9

96Firebird

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 2010
5,742
340
126
positivedoppler said:
I"m saying if they already have the design in place, it would be a quick and easy.
Click to expand...

I disagree that we can just assume they already have everything in place needed for variable refresh during gaming. There is obviously a difference between the power saving features and the gaming features. This is evident due to the fact that the gaming features work on some R9 cards, while the power saving feature work on all.
 
exar333

exar333

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2004
8,518
8
91
positivedoppler said:
I don't see how Intel will not support it. AMD claims that their implementation of A-Sync originated in Laptops due to the need for power saving. For Intel, they have a greater need for power saving than state of the art gaming graphics.
Click to expand...

Agree.

It might take a while for Intel to support it fully, but I don't see any reason why they wouldn't eventually.
 
V

VulgarDisplay

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2009
6,188
2
76
ShintaiDK said:
If that was the case, a much larger group of AMDs GPUs should support Freesync, yet they dont.
Click to expand...

Anything 7xxx and up supports Async. Only Rx 2xx series GPU's support it in Games. Intel would mostly be interested in Video Sync and desktop refresh rates to save power.
 
ShintaiDK

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
146
106
VulgarDisplay said:
Anything 7xxx and up supports Async. Only Rx 2xx series GPU's support it in Games. Intel would mostly be interested in Video Sync and desktop refresh rates to save power.
Click to expand...

I see.

But we have to see what they announce, if anything. They have been quiet about the matter and no info on DP1.2a in any released material for future products, including Skylake and NUCs.
 
Last edited:
S

Silverforce11

Lifer
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
That's just stupid, shipping such a giant monitor will cost you more than its original price.

It sounds like it just requires a firmware update though.

Bodes well for other monitor makers if its that easy.
 
N

Noctifer616

Senior member
Nov 5, 2013
380
0
76
Silverforce11 said:
On the advert, it implies you have to send the monitor back to the manufacturer... you have to cover the shipping costs.

It's a STUPID gimmick.
Click to expand...

And when exactly can they enable it? Can people send it in now? If so, would be really interested in some reviews comparing it to G-sync.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom