Nvidia and Freesync... never?

[kawi6rr]

Yeah. And there's the simple fact that if you go AMD, you are going with a supplier that is less reliable in delivering new cards compared to NVIDIA.

GTX 1080 launched in May of 2016. It wasn't until August 2017 that AMD FreeSync users had the honor of buying a roughly equivalent card to the 1080, but for more money. Oh, and it guzzles more power, too.

Only for users who are waiting for the fastest card out and AMD only dropped the ball this time around. My 570 does everything I need it to do and more, so did my 290 and my 280x and so on.

Yawn on the doom and gloom...

 

[Arachnotronic]

Only for users who are waiting for the fastest card out and AMD only dropped the ball this time around. My 570 does everything I need it to do and more, so did my 290 and my 280x and so on.

Yawn on the doom and gloom...

Yeah, that's nice that your 570 does what you want it to do, but a lot of us want much more performance than that.

 

[ozzy702]

Yeah, that's nice that your 570 does what you want it to do, but a lot of us want much more performance than that.

Exactly, I'm running 1440p @144hz. A 570 can't even push 60fps in plenty of titles at 1400p. I upgrade GPUs yearly and systems about every three years. Interestingly enough I see the possibility of my next CPU being from AMD in 2018-2019 which I haven't used in my main gaming box forever but I seriously doubt AMD will be a consideration for GPUs anytime soon, especially when I make the jump to 4k @ 120hz+.

 

[Tup3x]

I think it's possible that some day NVIDIA just says announces that "By the way, we'll support Adaptive sync and we call it G-SYNC Lite" or something like that.

 

[Rifter]

Honestly, that's why I had no problem picking up a Gsync monitor six months ago. I realized that despite using both AMD and NVIDIA cards for over a decade I would be on NVIDIA for at least the next 5 years so it was a non-issue. Before that I had the mindset that I "didn't want to get locked into one ecosystem" but then realized that since AMD will fail to deliver for at least the next three years, I'll be on NVIDIA for the next five.

Im pretty much in the same boat. I was going to go vega and Freesync display but when AMD completely dropped the ball with Vega i realized that for the next 2 generation or so Nvidia was going to be the only company offering top tier performance. So im waiting out Volta and will jump on a 2070/2080 depending on which is needed for solid 4k performance. And get a Gsync display at that time.

I dont like being vendor locked, but if i have to be then im going with the company that offers a full range of products not one that stops in the middle with nothing on the high end.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Im pretty much in the same boat. I was going to go vega and Freesync display but when AMD completely dropped the ball with Vega i realized that for the next 2 generation or so Nvidia was going to be the only company offering top tier performance. So im waiting out Volta and will jump on a 2070/2080 depending on which is needed for solid 4k performance. And get a Gsync display at that time.

I dont like being vendor locked, but if i have to be then im going with the company that offers a full range of products not one that stops in the middle with nothing on the high end.

Whether you go with FreeSync or G-Sync, you are literally vendor-locked.

 

[DeathReborn]

NVIDIA can exert just as much control if they moved to an implementation of adaptive sync. The only reason Freesync is "all over the place" is because AMD allows it to be, which is a good thing in my opinion. If AMD demanded higher standards, we lose budget FS monitors entirely. With the way they do it, we get both high-end and cheaper options.

NVIDIA would have their own branding and their own standards because they wouldn't be adapting Freesync, they'd be designing their own implementation of displayport's adaptive sync. The difference is that this hypothetical monitor would work with AMD GPUs as well, through Freesync. The only reason they keep G-Sync is to lock customers into their ecosystem and sell monitors for higher prices. Nothing about it benefits any of us.

FreeSync is hit and miss, it's hard to recommend a system that can hide a real turd of a FreeSync monitor amongst some average or good ones. The Frequency Range etc should be right next to the FreeSync branding so the customer knows what they are getting. AMD don't have to demand higher standards, just inform the customer what it is they are buying. FreeSync Bronze, Silver, Gold etc would be a simple method of doing so with little or no cost involved.

 

[Rifter]

Whether you go with FreeSync or G-Sync, you are literally vendor-locked.

I know, thats why i said this "I dont like being vendor locked, but if i have to be then im going with the company that offers a full range of products not one that stops in the middle with nothing on the high end."

 

[kawi6rr]

Yeah, that's nice that your 570 does what you want it to do, but a lot of us want much more performance than that.

You clearly missed my point!

In response to you stating that AMD is less reliable as a GPU manufacturer: Only this time around and only in the high end were they late. You are insinuating that AMD in large is less reliable when in fact they’ve been putting out solid GPU’s in the low and mid range where most cards are sold.

 

[tential]

Im pretty much in the same boat. I was going to go vega and Freesync display but when AMD completely dropped the ball with Vega i realized that for the next 2 generation or so Nvidia was going to be the on y company offering top tier performance. So im waiting out Volta and will jump on a 2070/2080 depending on which is needed for solid 4k performance. And get a Gsync display at that time.

I dont like being vendor locked, but if i have to be then im going with the company that offers a full range of products not one that stops in the middle with nothing on the high end.

Exactly why I'm leaving the AMD camp and getting a Gsync monitor.
I had a sinking feeling I made a mistake getting a Freesync monitor when everyone was happy about 1440p levels of performance back in January from the Vega comparison to the GTX 1080. Even more of a sinking feeling when people said "I don't need GTX 1080Ti performance or care about that price bracket of performance."

Now, I have a monitor I can't utilize because I went Freesync.

You clearly missed my point!

In response to you stating that AMD is less reliable as a GPU manufacturer: Only this time around and only in the high end were they late. You are insinuating that AMD in large is less reliable when in fact they’ve been putting out solid GPU’s in the low and mid range where most cards are sold.

You're missing the reliability factor. Again, we're saying high end, and he said if you don't care about the high end, you're PERFECTLY FINE with freesync.

Again, freesync/amd fits a ton of buyers as you indicate. I'm happy for all those buyers. For those of us who want top end performance, I can't recommend AMD, as they aren't reliable, timely, etc. and when you're a high end consumer, you basically have a useless paperweight if you can't upgrade to the next high tier level of performance.

I DEEPLY regret buying into the Gsync tax narrative. I can't believe I fell for that. Gsync is BETTER than Freesync, it has a larger range. It's NOT an equivalent product therefore. Also, the Nvidia GPU that goes with the Gsync Monitor is available FAR earlier than AMD. Is that not worth paying for? If I had went Gsync and gotten a GTX 1070, I would have paid the Gsync tax and THEN some.

When the Gsync tax is $1k+ like it is in my case, it definitely hurts. But for everyone here crying about a $200 Gsync tax... I just can't believe you guys wouldn't factor in the Nvidia benefits.

 

[tential]

Also AMD high end GPUs are severely more supply constrained at launch causing ridiculous prices. If you're at the high end, you're Gsync Tax ~ AMD Release Tax
Assuming you can even get a card. 290x/Furyx/Vega were all extremely hard to get cards, and if you want an AIB card? Great, you've got to wait even longer. By the time AIB cards come out from AMD, the wait for Volta is extremely short. Shorter than I waited for Vega lol.

 

[Arachnotronic]

You clearly missed my point!

In response to you stating that AMD is less reliable as a GPU manufacturer: Only this time around and only in the high end were they late. You are insinuating that AMD in large is less reliable when in fact they’ve been putting out solid GPU’s in the low and mid range where most cards are sold.

They are less reliable if you are somebody who buys high-end. I don't care where most cards are sold, I am talking about my own purchasing decisions and needs.

 

[urvile]

Exactly why I'm leaving the AMD camp and getting a Gsync monitor.
I had a sinking feeling I made a mistake getting a Freesync monitor when everyone was happy about 1440p levels of performance back in January from the Vega comparison to the GTX 1080. Even more of a sinking feeling when people said "I don't need GTX 1080Ti performance or care about that price bracket of performance."

Now, I have a monitor I can't utilize because I went Freesync.

I have to agree with this because I did the exact same thing and I am one of those people who wants performance . I want to be able to max everything out at 1440p. That's why I game on PC. However I now have some anecdotal proof that freesync does work because I was gaming on the same monitor with Fury X cards and it was really smooth. Cannot say the same about my 1080 tis at the moment though. On older games like far cry 3/4 I get insane frame drops and spikes.

Clearly freesync was taking care of that effectively because I wasn't having the issue on the Fury X cards. I will be paying a 200$ g-sync tax and I will have to mess around selling my current monitor but I really don't care.

 

[amenx]

Nvidia do it for 2 reasons:
1) to make money from licensing. This is the reason for a businesses existence after all.
2) enforce a high quality standard, which is required for Nvidia to maintain their premium brand. So sure their might be a lot of freesync displays out there but most of them don't come up to the min required spec of every gsync display ever released.

Thats all fine, but my point is they can keep their 'higher standard' GSync and charge whatever they want for it under their licensing, NO ISSUES THERE. But I think they should ALSO allow their GPUs to work with whatever alternate adaptive sync tech other displays may feature, incl freesync. They can hammer the point that their Gsync is better or superior as it may indeed be, but dont shut out their customers from making use of the alternatives, This added compatibility to work with other adaptive sync displays should not impact their Gsync business much (if it is superior), but it allows their customers a much wider choice of displays and could stave off those who may switch to competitions GPUs because of it. If I were to switch from Nvidia to AMD, this could be my no.1 reason for doing so.

 

[biostud]

nvidia earn money when the sell GPU's and they earn money when they sell gsync modules, why should the support monitors they earn zero dollars on?

Obviously if AMD at some point gains enough GPU marketshare, then nvidia might change their strategy, but until then it is not going to happen.

 

[tential]

Thats all fine, but my point is they can keep their 'higher standard' GSync and charge whatever they want for it under their licensing, NO ISSUES THERE. But I think they should ALSO allow their GPUs to work with whatever alternate adaptive sync tech other displays may feature, incl freesync. They can hammer the point that their Gsync is better or superior as it may indeed be, but dont shut out their customers from making use of the alternatives, This added compatibility to work with other adaptive sync displays should not impact their Gsync business much (if it is superior), but it allows their customers a much wider choice of displays and could stave off those who may switch to competitions GPUs because of it. If I were to switch from Nvidia to AMD, this could be my no.1 reason for doing so.

In the real world, people do things for their best interest. Why would Nvidia allow you to use Gsync for free when I'll literally pay money to use it just to use the underlying Nvidia GPU to the full potential?

For everyone other than the few 4K useres like myself, a GTX 1070 + gsync + the benefit of having the GPU a FULL YEAR earlier > waiting a year + Vega (Upcharged due to AMD low supply as ALWAYS during a high end AMD launch) + freesync

People are deluding themselves into thinking gsync is a terrible deal without taking in the full picture. They just hyper focus on Gsync and get upset, without realizing the full picture.

 

[nathanddrews]

To be honest, until we see a major improvement in LCD response time, it doesn't matter what refresh technology it has. Sadly, CRT/PDP/SED/FED are all dead, so all hope is that FreeSync/GSync OLED/CLEDIS/other direct view emissive displays come to market. Even my 180Hz G-Sync LCD showed its limitations and couldn't hold a candle to my current CRT for overall smoothness and motion clarity. At this point, we're just polishing the turd that is LCD.

 

[wilds]

To be honest, until we see a major improvement in LCD response time, it doesn't matter what refresh technology it has. Sadly, CRT/PDP/SED/FED are all dead, so all hope is that FreeSync/GSync OLED/CLEDIS/other direct view emissive displays come to market. Even my 180Hz G-Sync LCD showed its limitations and couldn't hold a candle to my current CRT for overall smoothness and motion clarity. At this point, we're just polishing the turd that is LCD.

I sort of feel the same way. I think we have the same 180hz display too, haha. I am a big 4k gamer, and the limitation at 60hz means my measly 1070 lets me run any game at 4k no problem.

This means my GPU budget is very low right now; compared to when I upgrade to 4k 144hz which is where I plan on spending my money and so far it looks to be a Gsync only option....

Another point not mentioned at all (and I completely understand why) is purchasing open boxed monitors. All my gsync monitors I own are factory refurbished open box via Best Buy online. I saved hundreds on each monitor this way, kept the hardware warranty for a year, and had a 1 month return window.

 

[Despoiler]

FSync and GSync are non-issues to me. I build my rigs for high framerates. 1440p or 4k are counter to that. Both technologies attempt to solve an issue I don't have because of the high framerates and/or high refresh rates. I don't buy this "I'm a high end gamer so I want Gsync" narrative. All you are trying to do is make yourself feel good about your purchases. Smart buyers would be looking to solve inherent issues to LCD technology. Persistence is a challenge that still needs to be overcome. Every LCD has it, it's distracting, and it gets you killed. It's why you still hear of people using CRTs. Black frame insertion is therefore the killer feature if you've already built for high framerate/high refresh rate. It cannot be used with FSync or Gsync though.

When it comes to FSync/GSync Intel will actually be the decider. Hint it won't be Nvidia that wins. Intel is already working on supporting adaptive sync. AMD's masterful move to get adaptive sync into the HDMI 2.1 spec will also seal it. Gsync will end up a failed experiment like NForce motherboard chipsets.

 

[nathanddrews]

I sort of feel the same way. I think we have the same 180hz display too, haha.

ASUS ROG Swift PG248Q? I bought two of them and while I was really happy with the high refresh and G-Sync, but I found the brightness to be unacceptably high and it only cemented the fact that I hate the motion artifacts that LCD introduces. I've bought and returned monitor flavors of TN, IPS, VA and honestly I'm just not happy with any of them. I'm probably too picky. I know I'm too picky. Hopefully the LG 8-series OLEDs have HDMI 2.1 and support native 4K 120Hz input.

 

[amenx]

In the real world, people do things for their best interest. Why would Nvidia allow you to use Gsync for free when I'll literally pay money to use it just to use the underlying Nvidia GPU to the full potential?

For everyone other than the few 4K useres like myself, a GTX 1070 + gsync + the benefit of having the GPU a FULL YEAR earlier > waiting a year + Vega (Upcharged due to AMD low supply as ALWAYS during a high end AMD launch) + freesync

People are deluding themselves into thinking gsync is a terrible deal without taking in the full picture. They just hyper focus on Gsync and get upset, without realizing the full picture.

You're quoting my post but not sure your responding to it. As stated, FINE, let Nvidia charge for their Gsync and market it as the 'superior' option. FINE, let display manufacturers incorporate Gsync at higher cost. But if someone wants buy a display of their choice which just so happens to have an alternative to GSync, dont punish them by ensuring the GPU cannot take advantage of it as well. The MAIN business of Nvidia is GPU sales.. why alienate their bread and butter customers by telling them 'sorry, we wont allow you to take advantage of other displays adaptive sync tech... either buy a Gsync display or shut up'.

 

[amenx]

When it comes to FSync/GSync Intel will actually be the decider. Hint it won't be Nvidia that wins. Intel is already working on supporting adaptive sync. AMD's masterful move to get adaptive sync into the HDMI 2.1 spec will also seal it. Gsync will end up a failed experiment like NForce motherboard chipsets.

I would certainly hope so.

 

[tential]

You're quoting my post but not sure your responding to it. As stated, FINE, let Nvidia charge for their Gsync and market it as the 'superior' option. FINE, let display manufacturers incorporate Gsync at higher cost. But if someone wants buy a display of their choice which just so happens to have an alternative to GSync, dont punish them by ensuring the GPU cannot take advantage of it as well. The MAIN business of Nvidia is GPU sales.. why alienate their bread and butter customers by telling them 'sorry, we wont allow you to take advantage of other displays adaptive sync tech... either buy a Gsync display or shut up'.

Keep preaching the ideals. All that matters is reality.

I need gsync to use adaptive sync with Nvidia.
I pay a premium, but can use that gpu power 1+ year earlier than the competition. I also get access to high end adaptive gpu power the competition simply doesn't currently have and won't have for a foreseeable future and also doesn't consistently deliver.

You can try to frame it anyway you want to make Nvidia look bad.

It's pretty simple. You want access to the fastest gpus first? You pay a premium.

If you're willing to wait? Then you should buy amd. I don't recommend Nvidia to anyone other than those who want to be on the cutting edge.

 

[amenx]

What does "waiting" have to do with anything? Not about Nvidia being better or preferable (all my recent cards are Nvidia). Not about AMDs disastrous delays, yes Nvidia is clearly a step ahead, so what?

I started this thread because of a display which I was set on buying several months ago, an HP 32" Omen (1440p). Turns out it has freesync. Turns out my Nvidia card would give me a miserable experience with it. Contrast that the AMD users who say its all smooth sailing up to 75hz. I avoided this display because I have an Nvidia card... and as an Nvidia user, I feel a little grumpy about it.

 

[kawi6rr]

You're missing the reliability factor. Again, we're saying high end, and he said if you don't care about the high end, you're PERFECTLY FINE with freesync.

I'm the one that actually said only missing in the high end so I'm missing nothing, my response was directly pointed at his post where he claims all AMD not high end.