[TechPowerUp article] FreeSync explained in more detail

[3DVagabond]

Pretty simple confirmation that freesync will simply not fix desktop issues as stated before. And that the monitors as such is "broken". Hence why the g-sync buffer module. With an ASIC the g-sync cost would be drasticly cut down in price.

The laptop demo fo freesync was the first giveaway.

I suggest everyone actually clicks the link and determines for themselves what the article states.

 

[f1sherman]

lol... Something just got shot down.

I hope we get AMD response soon.
Meanwhile maybe some of dozen of fresh Mantle enthusiastics on this forum can comment :sneaky:

Im sorry, im sorry j/k

Seriously now I thought about posting this earlier but gave up, because I didnt want to be all negative.

But think about it:
If AMD really HAD response to G-Sync, wouldn't they be ALL OVER IT. Instead of barely mentioning it?

 

[3DVagabond]

I hope we get AMD response soon.
Meanwhile maybe some of dozen of fresh Mantle enthusiastics on this forum can comment :sneaky:

Im sorry, im sorry j/k

Seriously now I thought about posting this earlier but gave up, because I didnt want to be all negative.

But think about it:
If AMD really HAD response to G-Sync, wouldn't they be ALL OVER IT. Instead of barely mentioning it?

This is the way AMD typically handles things. I wouldn't read too much into it.

I think this was just to show the journalists (so they'd tell us, of course) that dynamic vsync (GSync/FreeSync) isn't that hard to do. They have the capability in their drivers already to do it and have had it for years. GSync is simply an adaptation of a feature that's been around for a long time.

That's the message. Whether or not they can follow up on it remains to be seen. As they say, "The proof is in the pudding".

 

[BallaTheFeared]

What AMD did was basically say we've had similar but inferior tech for eight years but had no idea what to do with it.

It's like Apple without Jobs.


Anyone think this will go anywhere knowing monitors need new hardware to use it?

 

[wand3r3r]

That said, Nvidia won't enable G-Sync for competing graphics chips because it has invested real time and effort in building a good solution and doesn't intend to "do the work for everyone." If the competition wants to have a similar feature in its products, Petersen said, "They have to do the work. They have to hire the guys to figure it out."

This sentiment is a familiar one coming from Nvidia. The company tends to view its GeForce GPUs and related solutions as a platform, much like the Xbox One or PS4. Although Nvidia participates in the larger PC gaming ecosystem, it has long been guarded about letting its competitors reap the benefits of its work in various areas, from GPU computing to PhysX to software enablement of advanced rendering techniques in AAA games.

Like it or not, there is a certain competitive wisdom in not handing off the fruits of your work to your competition free of charge. That's not, however, how big PC players like Intel and AMD have traditionally handled new standards like USB and x86-64. (Intel in particular has done a lot of work "for everyone.")

So nvidia is good at marketing, upselling, and trying to build a closed system. If they do keep it closed it will simply be a niche and I don't see it going beyond the minor effect physx or other closed features have went.

On the other hand, I don't know if freesync will ever come to the market, nor do I put much hope in the widespread availability or interest based on that little demo. It was just a little marketing stunt until we see plans to bring it to the market.

To me the article looks like NV trying to snub AMD and pretend like they're apple.

 

[sontin]

So, why does the GPU need this polling in the first place? If the frames just needs to be pushed to the controller to be displayed, why this polling?

The GPU doesnt know what the fastest refresh rate of the monitor is.

But the interesting question is: What does the G-Sync controller do that can't be done on the GPU?

The G-Sync module is resonsible for holding the frame until it triggers the next frame.

 

[BrightCandle]

Freesync requires DisplayPort 1.3, it requires an optional extension that is currently only found on embedded display port. pcper.com in their latest CES podcast talk about the technology and the fact its not even remotely likely this year because the spec for DisplayPort isn't even out yet, let alone monitors based on it.

They didn't talk about the predictive nature of Freesync though, I am not sure why that is required and how it works but I have no reason to doubt techpowerup on that point nor pcper on the availability time frame.

 

[dacostafilipe]

The GPU doesnt know what the fastest refresh rate of the monitor is.

Of course it does, it's in the EDID ...

 

[sontin]

We're talking here about synchronisation. With G-Sync the GPU doesn't know the maximum refresh rate anymore. It's sending the frame nearly immediately (right now 1ms lag) to the G-Sync module.

 

[dacostafilipe]

This post in the B3D forum by Psycho kinda explains where we are at the moment:

So Petersen pretty much confirms that it can be done properly (otherwise he would have denied it) on laptops / eDP - so the "speculative framerate prediction" speculation brought up is wrong.
And the DP protocol should be capable of it too, but the too-intrusive scalers on most displays are the problem. And we should, as suspected, see the g-sync module as a proof of concept replacement scaler/displaycontroller, not as an necessary addition. (and very much a prototype in it's rough/expensive hardware implementation).

I guess we've already seen most of the gsync enabled monitor models there will be before a proper standard takes over ( / display manufacturers adds the neccesary support to their own display controllers)

Source: http://beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=64785&page=3

That's also what I can understand from Petersen's interview. I do now understand why nVidia needs the extra controller.

Not, what's more easy/cheap to implement. G-Sync or a more flexible controller on the LCD like we have today in Laptops? Because I don't know that answer, I will just wait for more official information.

 

[sontin]

The problem was never the DP standard. nVidia uses it. So AMD statements that nVidia doesn't support VBLANK is wrong.

The problem is the hardware in the monitor. Communication with the GPU and the holding of the refresh instead of only changing the refresh rate.

It's clear that nVidia didn't invent the G-Sync module for locking people into their own enviroment. They could do it much cheaper.

 

[ShintaiDK]

This post in the B3D forum by Psycho kinda explains where we are at the moment:


Source: http://beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=64785&page=3

That's also what I can understand from Petersen's interview. I do now understand why nVidia needs the extra controller.

Not, what's more easy/cheap to implement. G-Sync or a more flexible controller on the LCD like we have today in Laptops? Because I don't know that answer, I will just wait for more official information.

G-Sync with ASIC would drive price down to "peanuts". But as I always said, G-Sync is the hotfox solution. However the incentive for display manufactors to do the proper one and change their already working hardware solution is slim at best. You would have to pay $$ for that incentive to materialize. And again, buy a new monitor.

 

[Grooveriding]

I think many guessed when we first saw gsync that it will not be long-lasting under that moniker, that is if there is actually enough interest in using it. If there is we'll wind up seeing it rolled into a standard that makes it possible on any monitor via the standard hardware set on the PCB, no custom module necessitating a $200 premium required.

These early test screens using the module will be quick $200 cash grabs cashing in on the early-adopter tax.

My guess is 2015 is where we will start to see actual real selection in monitors that support gsync or something like it under a different moniker. Not just the current TN stuff with outrageous markups, but IPS, AMVA with all sorts of resolutions and from more vendors than the current small handful.

I want a technology like this in my monitor but won't put a penny to it until I can get it from a vendor like Dell in a monitor of high quality that is worth having it in.

 

[blackened23]

http://techreport.com/news/25878/nvidia-responds-to-amd-free-sync-demo

Yep. Free-sync: proof of concept in a laptop without meaningful products or implementations coming forth. Unless AMD convinces panel makers to do so - and even then, it doesn't do what g-sync does. This is more or less what I expected of AMD.

Key part of the article:

However, Petersen quickly pointed out an important detail about AMD's "free sync" demo: it was conducted on laptop systems. Laptops, he explained, have a different display architecture than desktops, with a more direct interface between the GPU and the LCD panel, generally based on standards like LVDS or eDP (embedded DisplayPort). Desktop monitors use other interfaces, like HDMI and DisplayPort, and typically have a scaler chip situated in the path between the GPU and the panel. As a result, a feature like variable refresh is nearly impossible to implement on a desktop monitor as things now stand.

 

[dacostafilipe]

All that is needed for this to work, as AMD explained it, was an eDP connection between the discrete GPU and the display, a controller for the screen that understands the variable refresh rate methods of eDP 1.0 specifications and an updated AMD driver to properly send it the signals. The panel can communicate that it supports this variable refresh technology to the graphics card through the EDID as resolutions and timings are communicated today and then the graphics driver would know to send the varying vblank signals to adjust panel refresh times on the fly.

Source : http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...h-FreeSync-Could-Be-Alternative-NVIDIA-G-Sync

When on a desktop, you need a new screen, no benefit from G-Sync. Now, we have to wait for DP 1.3 screens to support this. But I predict nVidia to have the only working solution for a long time (+-1year).

Koduri told me that AMD wasn't bringing this demo out to rain on NVIDIA's G-Sync parade but instead to get media interested in learning about this feature of eDP 1.0 and DP 1.3, urging the hardware companies responsible to more quickly produce the necessary controllers and integrate them with upcoming panels in 2014.

Koduri did admit that NVIDIA deserved credit for seeing this potential use of the variable refresh feature and bringing it to market as quickly as they did. It has raised awareness of the issue and forced AMD and the rest of the display community to take notice.

 

[blackened23]

Koduri told me that AMD wasn't bringing this demo out to rain on NVIDIA's G-Sync parade but instead to get media interested in learning about this feature of eDP 1.0 and DP 1.3, urging the hardware companies responsible to more quickly produce the necessary controllers and integrate them with upcoming panels in 2014.

So in other words, not a single monitor on the market right now supports free-sync. AT's article made it sound like everyone could get a g-sync alternative for free. Guess not.

 

[blackened23]

On the other hand, I don't know if freesync will ever come to the market, nor do I put much hope in the widespread availability or interest based on that little demo. It was just a little marketing stunt until we see plans to bring it to the market.

This is what I said when news of free-sync hit. Now Kojuri will state otherwise, but this was simply a cheap shot at nvidia, but at least AMD came clean and admitted that free-sync doesn't work as everyone thought it would. In other words, everyone thought it would work on all existing monitors.

Sounds like it was an AMD marketing stunt. Just like you said.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Source : http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...h-FreeSync-Could-Be-Alternative-NVIDIA-G-Sync

When on a desktop, you need a new screen, no benefit from G-Sync. Now, we have to wait for DP 1.3 screens to support this. But I predict nVidia to have the only working solution for a long time (+-1year).

DP 1.3 alone doesnt fix this. You also need to change the scalar hardware and so on. And it wont come for "free". Plus even then, it might only be "gamer models".

 

[Keysplayr]

Pretty simple confirmation that freesync will simply not fix desktop issues as stated before. And that the monitors as such is "broken". Hence why the g-sync buffer module. With an ASIC the g-sync cost would be drasticly cut down in price.

The laptop demo fo freesync was the first giveaway.

I suggest everyone actually clicks the link and determines for themselves what the article states.

You're trying to make it sound like if people click on the link, it will show how what you quoted from ShintaDK is not accurate. Why? I think he is spot on.
If people click the link, it will show what ShintaDK described. So, not sure why a different outcome was implied by you.

 

[blackened23]

Freesync requires:

Displayport 1.3
A new monitor controller (this is mentioned at PCPer)
new firmware

No monitor on the market, and no monitors being developed support any of this. So that begs the question as to whether free-sync is coming in 2014 at all. I kinda doubt it. Here's the PCPer article:

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...h-FreeSync-Could-Be-Alternative-NVIDIA-G-Sync

To be clear, just because a monitor would run with DisplayPort 1.3 doesn't guarantee this feature would work. It also requires the controller on the display to understand and be compatible with the variable refresh portions of the spec, which with eDP 1.0 at least, isn't required. AMD is hoping that with the awareness they are building with stories like this display designers will actually increase the speed of DP 1.3 adoption and include support for variable refresh rate with them. That would mean an ecosystem of monitors that could potentially support variable speed refresh on both AMD and NVIDIA cards. All that would be needed on the PC side is a software update for both Radeon and GeForce graphics cards.

So I guess free-sync requires a controller board and new hardware unlike previously thought. A new controller board integrated into a DP 1.3 monitor and new monitor is not free.

 

[ShintaiDK]

DP 1.3 alone might first be finalized as a spec around summer time. And thats being optimistic.

 

[DigDog]

Freesync requires:

Displayport 1.3
A new monitor controller (this is mentioned at PCPer)
new firmware

also lets not forget none of these would be "free".

 

[blackened23]

also lets not forget none of these would be "free".

The term "free-sync" was nothing more than a marketing stunt to get attention away from g-sync for a few weeks - like you said, free-sync isn't free. It's going to cost money just like g-sync.

At least AMD's head graphics guy came clean. And didn't perpetuate the marketing nonsense that the term "free-sync" implies. For that he (Kojuri) gets my respect. The other marketing guys at AMD who tried to perpetuate this as a free g-sync alternative? Not so much. I mean they had us all believing a free g-sync alternative was as simple as flipping a switch in a driver - and was able to use existing monitors. Little did we know.

 

[Arkadrel]

The thing is alot of laptops already have this feature thats needed to get it working in them.

So in alot of laptops you ll be able to get FreeSync, in 2014.

Also the "Displayport 1.3" should be like 90days away or so, and hopefully at some point Desktop monitors that support it will start selling.

But your right, on the desktop 2014 probably wont have many monitors that can do it.

 

[dacostafilipe]

Why? I think he is spot on.

His first sentence is not correct.

Pretty simple confirmation that freesync will simply not fix desktop issues as stated before.

It will with a compatible screen. The tech can make it happen, as it's more or less the same tech used by nVidia.

Now, we don't have such screens for desktop at the moment (I did not find any on google) and we don't know when they will be available. FreeSync is, for now just a tech, not a real product like G-Sync is.