[TechPowerUp article] FreeSync explained in more detail

[bystander36]

The articles I've read so far say that FreeSync produces similar results to G-sync.

"Dynamic refresh rates would theoretically work like G-Sync by specifying how long the display remained blank on a frame-by-frame basis, providing for smoother total movement."

But the way that is worded, has me worried about latency. They've mentioned other things that would suggest latency may be different.

I have issues with latency, more than most. I get nausea from it.

A demo won't show you latency. Only hands on use can. So yes, it may look similar, but it might have downsides with game play.

 

[Creig]

Unfortunately, AMD's Freesync won't work on Nvidia, at least not until Nvidia changes their cards to support certain features.

Hopefully that changes.

Another thing to consider is that Freesync may not work as well. AMD is trying to utilize existing tech to make this happen, but they may end up compromising a bit in the process. They mentioned that they think they can mimic G-sync with the use of VBlank and triple buffering. If they need triple buffering, that may mean they are introducing latency into the mix. Maybe as a look ahead system.

As long as it becomes an industry standard, Nvidia would be free to add the capability to their cards, if they aren't already able to use it.

I also have the suspicion that FreeSync may not work quite as well as G-sync, although it's way too early to make any sort of informed guesses. But even if it works at only 80% of G-sync, the fact that it's a standard that will be open for both Nvidia/AMD owners to use gives it a huge plus in my opinion.

 

[sontin]

That's the problem:
AMD didn't show that FreeSync is like G-Sync. They showed two synchronized monitors.

I think people really missing the huge drawback: Neither eDP nor DP defines real no lag synchronisation mode between the gpu and the display.

If you look at the eDP standard you will see that techniques like PSR are only usable with buffers and static images or a very static framerate.

 

[bystander36]

As long as it becomes an industry standard, Nvidia would be free to add the capability to their cards, if they aren't already able to use it.

I also have the suspicion that FreeSync may not work quite as well as G-sync, although it's way too early to make any sort of informed guesses. But even if it works at only 80% of G-sync, the fact that it's a standard that will be open for both Nvidia/AMD owners to use gives it a huge plus in my opinion.

If this Freesync has downsides, I'd really prefer a new standard be created, rather than trying to use existing ones to patch together a G-sync similar product.

You are right, this is all guess work based on bits of info. I want this to be open, I just hope they don't compromise to do it.

 

[Creig]

But the way that is worded, has me worried about latency. They've mentioned other things that would suggest latency may be different.

I have issues with latency, more than most. I get nausea from it.

A demo won't show you latency. Only hands on use can. So yes, it may look similar, but it might have downsides with game play.

Yup. I think the only way to really evaluate this technology is a hands-on viewing. Kind of like 3D. Acceptable video is a very subjective topic and Youtube videos do nothing to accurately portray its impact on each person.

 

[Eymar]

You actually believe FreeSync will come to any sort of fruition?

I didnt think AMD would get framepacing since they didn't have it for the longest time so I have hope here. Now I cant tell difference from 290x crossfire and Titan SLI (where 7970 XF and 680 GTX SLI was night and day in Nvidia's favor in alot of games). R9 290xhas really changed my opinion on AMD and gives me hope that they'll get it done (especially if Mantle shows benefits) .

 

[Eymar]

Yup. I think the only way to really evaluate this technology is a hands-on viewing. Kind of like 3D. Acceptable video is a very subjective topic and Youtube videos do nothing to accurately portray its impact on each person.

Similar to 120hz vs 60hz monitors, some people cant tell the difference so like everyone else really want to see G-sync in action. I think I'm in the boat where I would see a definite improvement with G-Sync in terms of smoothness at 30-60fps. Currently can tell when games fall below 60FPS on 120hz monitor without FRAPS.

 

[Lonbjerg]

I'm pretty sure you know exactly what I'm saying, but I'll spell it out for you anyhow.

Of the two options, one that works on Nvidia only and one that will work for everybody, I believe the one that will work for everybody to be the best overall solution for us, the end consumers.

So what you wrote here is false?

That is not moving the industry forward. That is paying a single monitor manufacturer to produce a single model incorporating G-Sync. Whereas AMD is working with industry as a whole to hopefully bring FreeSync to everybody via DP 1.3, Nvidia included.

Did I understand that you do not want to stand by your previous post?

 

[OCGuy]

Yup. I think the only way to really evaluate this technology is a hands-on viewing. Kind of like 3D. Acceptable video is a very subjective topic and Youtube videos do nothing to accurately portray its impact on each person.

Well seeing as multiple reviews called it revolutionary, I'm going to guess it is a positive addition to the gaming/display landscape.

 

[Creig]

So what you wrote here is false?



Did I understand that you do not want to stand by your previous post?

I stand by what I said. I believe FreeSync, should it work as advertised, would be of greater benefit to us end users than G-sync due to it hopefully being incorporated into an industry standard.

 

[Lonbjerg]

I stand by what I said. I believe FreeSync, should it work as advertised, would be of greater benefit to us end users than G-sync due to it hopefully being incorporated into an industry standard.

No, no...you said that there would come 1 monitor form 1 company because NVIDIA paid them to do it.
Should I quote you again?

But I take your "dogdeball" to be a indication you no longer hold that view...at least not in public

 

[BrightCandle]

The gsync module comes with two other modes as well. The first is the 3D vision mode for active stutter glasses and the other is a low persistence mode for a flashing backlight. Presumably all the gsync capable monitors will come with both of these enabled (IPS ones in the future can't possibly come with 3D however).

Its looking like Freesync right now is an inferior implementation based on what we know, that its good for consistent frame rates lower than refresh but not for genuinely syncing the screen with the GPU. I hope AMD goes further than this, puts out a genuine solution that doesn't require additional buffering and prediction and does so as an industry standard, or adopts gsync as that solution.

 

[3DVagabond]

The gsync module comes with two other modes as well. The first is the 3D vision mode for active stutter glasses and the other is a low persistence mode for a flashing backlight. Presumably all the gsync capable monitors will come with both of these enabled (IPS ones in the future can't possibly come with 3D however).

Its looking like Freesync right now is an inferior implementation based on what we know, that its good for consistent frame rates lower than refresh but not for genuinely syncing the screen with the GPU. I hope AMD goes further than this, puts out a genuine solution that doesn't require additional buffering and prediction and does so as an industry standard, or adopts gsync as that solution.

nVidia has already said they are keeping it for themselves. It'll be fine though. There's already a standard in the works that will accommodate dynamic vsync.

There's always the option of maintaining fps at/above the screens native refresh rate and rendering the whole concept irrelevant. Right now, considering it's adding ~$300 to the price of a 1080p monitor, that should be pretty easy to accomplish.

 

[Lonbjerg]

nVidia has already said they are keeping it for themselves. It'll be fine though. There's already a standard in the works that will accommodate dynamic vsync.

There's always the option of maintaining fps at/above the screens native refresh rate and rendering the whole concept irrelevant. Right now, considering it's adding ~$300 to the price of a 1080p monitor, that should be pretty easy to accomplish.

Is your statment that G-Sync and FreeSync are indentical products that gives the same end-user experience and can be verified by reviews?

Or does one solution offer features/benefits for the end user experince that hte other dosn't have the techinal possibility to do?

(this might be sig worhty^^)

 

[3DVagabond]

Is your statment that G-Sync and FreeSync are indentical products that gives the same end-user experience and can be verified by reviews?

Or does one solution offer features/benefits for the end user experince that hte other dosn't have the techinal possibility to do?

(this might be sig worhty^^)

You go ahead and pay $300 for Gsync. It's your money.

 

[DarkKnightDude]

That's pretty much my problem with G-Sync. Locks hardware and I could buy a whole new monitor for 300 bucks. Whopee.

 

[Lonbjerg]

You go ahead and pay $300 for Gsync. It's your money.

That was a funny way of saying no

 

[3DVagabond]

That was a funny way of saying no

Not buying into your agenda. You like it, you buy it.

 

[sontin]

nVidia has already said they are keeping it for themselves. It'll be fine though. There's already a standard in the works that will accommodate dynamic vsync.

Can you show me this standard?

 

[Lonbjerg]

Not buying into your agenda. You like it, you buy it.

That wasn't the question, since you seems to have forgotten it here comes again...perhaps you will answer it this time?

Is your statment that G-Sync and FreeSync are indentical products that gives the same end-user experience and can be verified by reviews?

Or does one solution offer features/benefits for the end user experince that hte other dosn't have the techinal possibility to do?

(this might be sig worhty^^)

 

[SirPauly]

That is not moving the industry forward. That is paying a single monitor manufacturer to produce a single model incorporating G-Sync. Whereas AMD is working with industry as a whole to hopefully bring FreeSync to everybody via DP 1.3, Nvidia included.

Proprietary may move the industry forward through innovation, choice and improved gaming experiences and if the market accepts it -- may create competition and awareness.

nVidia offers G-sync --creates competition and awareness -- AMD's FreeSync!

 

[Shivansps]

The thing is monitor CAN support DP 1.3 input, resolutions and refresh whiout having proper hardware support for Freesync, that is where the AMD pr lie dies. Its not really an industry standart, someone needs to go ahead and made a controller ASIC that has an *unecesarry* support for FreeSync.

The AMD solution uses features standart intro DP 1.3 specs, but you still need a controller that support something that is not really needed.

Once all that happens G-Sync will be ASIC too and it will be not really matter as you can expect a premium on ASIC with FreeSync support.

 

[Keysplayr]

You go ahead and pay $300 for Gsync. It's your money.

It won't be 300.00 for long. When more monitor companies release their G-Sync ready monitors, the prices, LIKE ANYTHING ELSE, will come down. Jeez, why don't you just switch over already. It would save you a lot of very difficult and hard to pass off arguing.

 

[Creig]

No, no...you said that there would come 1 monitor form 1 company because NVIDIA paid them to do it.
Should I quote you again?

But I take your "dogdeball" to be a indication you no longer hold that view...at least not in public

You apparently skimmed over my post where I said, "As far as I know, there is only one model of monitor from one manufacturer that is currently available with a G-sync module. And that is the Asus VG248QE. Unless there are others out there that I haven't heard about yet."

I wasn't aware that there were any other monitors out there that were planning to get G-sync modules. bystander36 linked three others that I hadn't heard about yet. I don't claim to be omniscient.

Now please stop your baiting.

 

[Lonbjerg]

You apparently skimmed over my post where I said, "As far as I know, there is only one model of monitor from one manufacturer that is currently available with a G-sync module. And that is the Asus VG248QE. Unless there are others out there that I haven't heard about yet."

I wasn't aware that there were any other monitors out there that were planning to get G-sync modules. bystander36 linked three others that I hadn't heard about yet. I don't claim to be omniscient.

Now please stop your baiting.

Do you think NVIDIA paided all the manufactors?
Or is that part also no longer valid?