[Sweclockers] AMD opens up about Freesync

[SoulWager]

I've never said anything you are attributing to me. All I'm doing is showing an actual credible source that shows the 2 points I highlighted. It does sync the monitor to the card on a frame by frame basis, and eDP has been around since 2009, which is all Adaptive-Sync is. Everything needed for it already exists. No new exotic hardware needed and it does sync the monitor to the GPU on a frame by frame basis.

People saying otherwise here are not referencing sources. I've even asked where this info is coming from.

eDP isn't equivalent to adaptive sync. Why do you think AMD hasn't released the windmill demo used at CES?

 

[Mand]

I've never said anything you are attributing to me. All I'm doing is showing an actual credible source that shows the 2 points I highlighted. It does sync the monitor to the card on a frame by frame basis, and eDP has been around since 2009, which is all Adaptive-Sync is. Everything needed for it already exists. No new exotic hardware needed and it does sync the monitor to the GPU on a frame by frame basis.

People saying otherwise here are not referencing sources. I've even asked where this info is coming from.

Use the search button. I've posted links, given direct quotes from AMD's head of visual computing saying that new hardware is required. You were in those threads - you could have read them. Demanding "SOURCE!!!" every single time, with the implication that I can be completely discredited by failing to do your homework for you for the tenth time, is getting really tiresome. I know you've seen the evidence. To pretend otherwise is wrong.

No, it does not sync frame-by-frame. That has not been demonstrated yet. It has not even been described in a technical fashion. There is no hardware capable of doing it. There has been no demonstration of it. There is nothing. To say "of course it does it! the VESA spec says it!" represents a misunderstanding of what a spec does. Specs don't invent hardware. Specs can and do get updated before suitable hardware exists. This is one of those cases. They've defined how A-Sync has to be implemented, the next step is implementing it.

AMD's head of visual computing himself said the point of the FreeSync push was to encourage hardware manufacturers to develop the necessary hardware. Go google it. It's not hard to find.

 

[rgallant]

so none of the 3rd party scalier chip manufacturers will make a scalier chip to the current vesa spec. very interesting .
I would think those chips are up dated all the time or maybe not , to bad for hdmi the update then it just won't work I guess.

 

[parvadomus]

Use the search button. I've posted links, given direct quotes from AMD's head of visual computing saying that new hardware is required. You were in those threads - you could have read them. Demanding "SOURCE!!!" every single time, with the implication that I can be completely discredited by failing to do your homework for you for the tenth time, is getting really tiresome. I know you've seen the evidence. To pretend otherwise is wrong.

No, it does not sync frame-by-frame. That has not been demonstrated yet. It has not even been described in a technical fashion. There is no hardware capable of doing it. There has been no demonstration of it. There is nothing. To say "of course it does it! the VESA spec says it!" represents a misunderstanding of what a spec does. Specs don't invent hardware. Specs can and do get updated before suitable hardware exists. This is one of those cases. They've defined how A-Sync has to be implemented, the next step is implementing it.

AMD's head of visual computing himself said the point of the FreeSync push was to encourage hardware manufacturers to develop the necessary hardware. Go google it. It's not hard to find.

VESA:

"Computer monitors normally refresh their displays at a fixed frame rate. In gaming applications, a computer’s CPU or GPU output frame rate will vary according to the rendering complexity of the image. If a display’s refresh rate and a computer’s render rate are not synchronized, visual artifacts—tearing or stuttering—can be seen by the user. DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync enables the display to dynamically match a GPU’s rendering rate, on a frame-by-frame basis, to produce a smoother, low latency, gaming experience."

"Adaptive-Sync is a proven and widely adopted technology. The technology has been a standard component of VESA’s embedded DisplayPort (eDP™) specification since its initial rollout in 2009. As a result, Adaptive-Sync technology is already incorporated into many of the building block components for displays that rely on eDP for internal video signaling. Newly introduced to the DisplayPort 1.2a specification for external displays, this technology is now formally known as DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync."

I don't know what are you trying to prove, really :|

 

[3DVagabond]

VESA:

"Computer monitors normally refresh their displays at a fixed frame rate. In gaming applications, a computer’s CPU or GPU output frame rate will vary according to the rendering complexity of the image. If a display’s refresh rate and a computer’s render rate are not synchronized, visual artifacts—tearing or stuttering—can be seen by the user. DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync enables the display to dynamically match a GPU’s rendering rate, on a frame-by-frame basis, to produce a smoother, low latency, gaming experience."

"Adaptive-Sync is a proven and widely adopted technology. The technology has been a standard component of VESA’s embedded DisplayPort (eDP™) specification since its initial rollout in 2009. As a result, Adaptive-Sync technology is already incorporated into many of the building block components for displays that rely on eDP for internal video signaling. Newly introduced to the DisplayPort 1.2a specification for external displays, this technology is now formally known as DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync."

I don't know what are you trying to prove, really :|

That's been quoted numerous times. It doesn't matter what VESA says, some here refuse to give it any credence. Hopefully, except for the select few, others understand.

Proof that they don't really grasp it is confusing Adaptive-Sync (which is a VESA standard) with Free-Sync (which is an AMD GPU feature) and they are not the same thing.

 

[Mand]

VESA:

"Computer monitors normally refresh their displays at a fixed frame rate. In gaming applications, a computer’s CPU or GPU output frame rate will vary according to the rendering complexity of the image. If a display’s refresh rate and a computer’s render rate are not synchronized, visual artifacts—tearing or stuttering—can be seen by the user. DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync enables the display to dynamically match a GPU’s rendering rate, on a frame-by-frame basis, to produce a smoother, low latency, gaming experience."

"Adaptive-Sync is a proven and widely adopted technology. The technology has been a standard component of VESA’s embedded DisplayPort (eDP™) specification since its initial rollout in 2009. As a result, Adaptive-Sync technology is already incorporated into many of the building block components for displays that rely on eDP for internal video signaling. Newly introduced to the DisplayPort 1.2a specification for external displays, this technology is now formally known as DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync."

I don't know what are you trying to prove, really :|

What I'm trying to get you to understand is there is a difference between a VESA spec and actual implementation. A spec does not specify a solution. It specifies how that solution would have to interface with DisplayPort.

A-Sync will, if it ever exists, "dynamically match a GPU’s rendering rate, on a frame-by-frame basis" as you are so fond of pointing out. That's a big if, though, because so far nobody has demonstrated actually being able to do that using the techniques that AMD has indicated form the basis for A-Sync.

Being in the spec doesn't mean it exists in hardware. I don't know how much more simpler I can put it.

And Vagabond, I am not refusing to give it credence. I give it full credence, for what it says. But I also know the difference between an addition of support for an optional feature to an existing spec and the creation of actual hardware. I give the VESA spec full credence - but I do not let it say more than it actually says.

 

[parvadomus]

What I'm trying to get you to understand is there is a difference between a VESA spec and actual implementation. A spec does not specify a solution. It specifies how that solution would have to interface with DisplayPort.

A-Sync will, if it ever exists, "dynamically match a GPU’s rendering rate, on a frame-by-frame basis" as you are so fond of pointing out. That's a big if, though, because so far nobody has demonstrated actually being able to do that using the techniques that AMD has indicated form the basis for A-Sync.

Being in the spec doesn't mean it exists in hardware. I don't know how much more simpler I can put it.

And Vagabond, I am not refusing to give it credence. I give it full credence, for what it says. But I also know the difference between an addition of support for an optional feature to an existing spec and the creation of actual hardware. I give the VESA spec full credence - but I do not let it say more than it actually says.

Its a matter of time for it to become real. Not only it will help for gaming but for power consumption. When the first monitor goes out, all the other manufacturers will compete to get their own implementations. We are only 5-6 months away.

 

[BrightCandle]

Its a matter of time for it to become real. Not only it will help for gaming but for power consumption. When the first monitor goes out, all the other manufacturers will compete to get their own implementations. We are only 5-6 months away.

Viewsonic disagrees, they think we are 12-18 months away. The reason is having enquired themselves with the scalar manufacturers they wont even include it until the end of the year, at which point they will start to make monitors on the design, putting it at least 12 months away at this point. But they aren't really that interested in doing it because the volume is expected to be too low. No idea how they intend to make the choice about go or no go, my source didn't say. But I think its dangerous to assume its that close, because it would assume that the scalar already exists (and hence AMD/partner would now have a demo) and that its just the monitor that needs development but that isn't the case.

My main concern about VESAs statements remains that they claim not only frame to frame but that this has been available since 2009 with eDP. But that isn't quite true, as far as I can tell PSR is bandwidth limited on the AUX channel and can't be used for 60hz (and it still keeps the panel at some frequency step not frame to frame) and transparent refresh rate adjustment is both low frequency on changes (intel suggested once a second in their presentation of the technology) and requires prediction. I can't find any evidence to suggest that PSR and TRRA can be used to achieve gsync competitor, hence it wasn't available in 2009. One of the two statements VESA has made is incorrect, and I really hope its the 2009 one and that the thing included in the 1.2a spec is not just those two technologies from eDP, because they will not compete favourably as they are with gsync.

 

[stahlhart]

For the third and last time, everyone agree to disagree, and quit beating this dead horse.
-- stahlhart