[TR] FreeSync monitors will sample next month, start selling next year

[Mand]

AMD is saving people from being locked to one hardware vendor with a gsync monitor. That's a good thing not a negative. The monitors are coming, and soon.

Except FreeSync requires AMD cards. That's the kind of deception I'm talking about, and you've bought it wholesale.

It is my belief that nvidia will abandon gsync shortly after adaptive sync is released.

And why would they do that? Nvidia has said publicly they believe G-Sync is a superior option to developing an A-Sync version, that G-Sync does things that aren't contained in the VESA spec update that it believes will lead to superior performance. And it's something they can use to hit AMD over the head with. What incentive do they have to abandon years and millions of dollars worth of R&D, on some pie-in-the-sky assessment that hardware developers will just automagically include A-Sync support without any prodding or extra development? Not all monitors will be A-Sync compatible, and that puts us in the very same situation AMD claims it's trying to avoid.

There's no reason for Nvidia to abandon G-Sync.

 

[jackstar7]

There's no reason for Nvidia to abandon G-Sync.

The obvious one: $$$

Let's see how strong adoption is among folks before leaping to conclusions about its place in the market.

 

[blackened23]

It is my belief that nvidia will abandon gsync shortly after adaptive sync is released. I myself would not buy a gsync monitor because of this. Others have more disposable income than me, but even if I had the funds I wouldn't spend them in a stupid manner.
.

LOL. Alrighty if you say so. Like I said a FS alternative is good, but as I thought in Jan 2014, at the news of FS, it won't be here until 2015. Here we are with AMD marketing up a storm for something that won't be available for a year. No surprises there, they've done that many times. Whatever.

The important question for gaming panels is something equivalent to lightboost or ULMB, in addition to FS. Lightboost was created by nvidia (originally for 3d only, made to work for 2d) and is a staple for gaming monitors. I personally find the g-sync + ULMB + 144hz combination to be very appealing for gaming, and who knows if FS will have something familiar. G-sync would work great for those games that are single player with lower(ish) framerates, while ULMB + 144hz is basically not beatable for any type of real competitive game if your framerate is high.

I guess we'll see during some random date in 2015.

 

[Leadbox]

Except FreeSync requires AMD cards.

Yes it does, but adaptive sync on the other hand doesn't and therein lies the :awe:ness of going it via a standards body.

 

[Mand]

The obvious one: $$$

You can make more $$$ by having a superior product that drives people to buy them. They think they can do that with G-Sync.

It's not as if they don't have access to the A-Sync protocols. They said, specifically, that they think G-Sync will be better. Now, they could be wrong, but they won't abandon something they think is better.

Now, could A-Sync take over completely? Sure, it's possible. But it's far from guaranteed. The reasoning behind thinking it will rests on several assumptions:

• A-Sync will be in every DP1.2a/DP1.3 compliant monitor
• A-Sync will not add to monitor production cost, as it will be part of the normal upgrades that display manufacturers acquire from ASIC manufacturers
• A-Sync will not cause monitor manufacturers to add a price premium
• A-Sync will work with every GPU

Every single one of these assumptions is wrong. Every single one:

• A-Sync is an optional part of the DP spec, not mandatory
• A-Sync will require significant hardware development and new components that weren't required previously (source: Asus)
• A-Sync, being optional and requiring additional hardware, will be targeted at a subset of the display population - when was the last time you saw a niche feature not have a price premium?
• A-Sync is just a component of variable refresh. Implementations of it are tied directly to the GPU, and even on just AMD's line, you can't use A-Sync on a R7 280. Nvidia won't support it at all.

The inevitability of an A-Sync takeover requires all of those assumptions being correct. Instead, we're going to have two competing, proprietary products: FreeSync and G-Sync. A monitor capable of using FreeSync won't be capable of using G-Sync, and a monitor capable of using G-Sync won't be capable of using FreeSync. Maybe, somehow, AMD can use its 35% discrete GPU market share to shoehorn the market into FreeSync, which would then cause Nvidia to retool G-Sync to start using A-Sync, but what exactly makes you think they have the muscle to edge out Nvidia when they're getting outsold two to one as it is now, and are at least a year behind in development?

 

[sontin]

Huh? The full Adaptive-Sync spec is only available on AMD cards right now while no other GPU vendor has announced support.

To use Adaptive-Sync in 6 months i need a AMD graphics card and a new monitor. Or i buy a existing G-Sync monitor and use it with my Kepler card.

 

[blackened23]

Yes it does, but adaptive sync on the other hand doesn't and therein lies the :awe:ness of going it via a standards body.

Does it? I mean AMD announced free-sync needing specific GPUs, of which the 280 series in absent from the list. I don't know what the deal is there.

http://techreport.com/news/26919/freesync-monitors-will-sample-next-month-start-selling-next-year

Some of AMD's current products use cheaper display controllers that won't be compatible with Adaptive-Sync. (A full list of compatible GPUs and APUs is available here.) However, Huddy said all future AMD hardware will support the feature. The firm is evidently committed to the technology, and it will be interesting to see how the finished products compare to equivalent G-Sync solutions. We will dutifully subject ourselves to hours of gaming "tests" to get to the bottom of that important question.

Does this contradict your statement? Sounds like A-sync requires an AMD GPU, of which the 280 series will not support. You tell me what you make of this. Because what AMD is admitting is not jiving with what you said.

 

[KingFatty]

The obvious question is, is this marketing strategy by AMD working anywhere?

One strategy could be that if you can't beat someone at a game, you destroy the game.

Here, AMD is trying to destroy the game by putting a feature out there for everyone. So it's in their interest to shout it from the rooftops as early as possible, because the idea is to spread FUD as much as possible.

 

[sontin]

Does it? I mean AMD announced free-sync needing specific GPUs, of which the 280 series in absent from the list. I don't know what the deal is there.

http://techreport.com/news/26919/freesync-monitors-will-sample-next-month-start-selling-next-year



Does this contradict your statement? Sounds like A-sync requires an AMD GPU, of which the 280 series will not support. You tell me what you make of this. Because what AMD is admitting is not jiving with what you said.

The full Adaptive-Sync needs a advanced display controller in the GPU. Only GCN 1.1 gpus support this.

 

[blackened23]

Here, AMD is trying to destroy the game by putting a feature out there for everyone. So it's in their interest to shout it from the rooftops as early as possible, because the idea is to spread FUD as much as possible.

Yeah, I think so. I don't think this strategy has ever worked for them. But they'll continue doing what they do, so, whatever.

 

[Mand]

One strategy could be that if you can't beat someone at a game, you destroy the game.

Here, AMD is trying to destroy the game by putting a feature out there for everyone. So it's in their interest to shout it from the rooftops as early as possible, because the idea is to spread FUD as much as possible.

Except the feature isn't for everyone, it's not even for all AMD users.

Their goal is FUD, and FUD only, because they got caught with their pants down and have nothing else.

 

[Leadbox]

Does it? I mean AMD announced free-sync needing specific GPUs, of which the 280 series in absent from the list. I don't know what the deal is there.

http://techreport.com/news/26919/freesync-monitors-will-sample-next-month-start-selling-next-year



Does this contradict your statement? Sounds like A-sync requires an AMD GPU, of which the 280 series will not support. You tell me what you make of this. Because what AMD is admitting is not jiving with what you said.

I see no contradiction, GCN1.0 lacks the necessary hardware to do variable refresh, I don't see the lack of jive with what I said about vesa adaptive sync.

 

[NIGELG]

People who bought Nvidia's expensive G Sync are crying and whining the most.

Warning issued for thread crapping.
-- stahlhart

 

[96Firebird]

People who bought Nvidia's expensive G Sync are crying and whining the most.

Where did you come up with this?

 

[jackstar7]

You can make more $$$ by having a superior product that drives people to buy them.

And we have no idea if the audience is going to be compelled to pay for their superior product.

Are you?

 

[ocre]

Comments like this,

It wouldn't be the first time a piece of superior technology was rendered obsolete by a piece of good enough tech that catered to a big market. The writing is on the wall.

You would be crazy to buy a gsync monitor because nvidia will eventually have to support these adaptive sync monitors.

Seriously? What the heck is all this?

Wow
look, nvidia has 2\3rds the dgpu market. Its composed of many who have the "want the best
, don't care about paying for it" mentality.
How can anyone sit here and claim than freesync can totally displace nvidia's solution? Just like that? Huh? Nvidia is not supporting freesync. That's 2\3rds of the dgpu market in PC gaming. It consist of the majority of the big spenders. Nvidia will not support it. How can anyone at this point be thinking that freesync is capable of changing this?

And people, including you vulger, claiming Intel is gonna support freesync? Huh? It is totally made up. Completely out of thin air. There is no indication what so ever that Intel will support. Yet your dancing in the street proclaiming complete fabrications...... Huh

Look, your making thus stuff up. Its a falacy based out if thin air.

Freesync may one day gain traction but we are nowhere near that right now. There is no way to have a meaningful discussion if its full of make believe. Intel has not announced any plans for freesync. If and when they do, feel free to bring in that element. As sure as you believe that this happening, reality is that it didn't.

You have to at least try not to let your fantasies take over what is actually going on. So let's be real here,

1) freesync is AMDs alternative to nvidia gsync. One that no one has seen in action yet, one that no one has ever reviewed. Because.....
2) its in development
3) nvidia has no plans to support it. They believe they have gone a better route.
4)Intel has never claimed to support freesync
5) the people who would be most interested in this kind of tech will most likely own a descrete video card.
6) those people choose nvidia over and 2 to 1

Its gonna take several of those things to change before freesync could ever tople gsync. Its not automatic, its not a for sure thing.....not by a long shot.

You have to invent a lot of things out if thin air to be claiming that nvidia will have to go the and route. That doesn't mean it never could happen, that just means a lot of stuff will have to change. There is a huge stretch based on imagination that goes from and finally having freesync on the market, to them making gsyn irrelevant. Why in the world......I mean, its not like AMD is making nvidia irrelevant anywhere else....I mean for real...it is totally crazy to automatically adopt that idea when it comes to freesync.

So down the road, things can go many ways. And if I want to totally invent sceneros, I can come up with thousands right now. The reality is anything could happen.


Freesync and gsync might both fall off the map. We could end up with a better method all together. Or end up just moving on with neither catching and no solution.

Freesync might not even compare to gsync, it might not be good at all. We really do not know

Intel may instead use gsync. Nvidia is already in cross licensing, I can make stuff up too, like nvidia wants to spread demand to make more money off the tech so they work out a deal with intel. But that is basesless. Totally

I actually believe that Intel will adopt niether, but u never know. I could make believe, I could say Intel will never adopt it and paint a future that goes on with Intel making their own Isync and pawning both.

But let's not do that. Let's not invent and make believe entire alternate universes. Let's discuss this in real context, let's discuss the real progress. That would be nice

 

[Mand]

And we have no idea if the audience is going to be compelled to pay for their superior product.

Are you?

Unless something drastic happens in the next month on both FreeSync and Radeon, yes I am.

Also, there's no guarantee FreeSync will be cheaper at retail. None whatsoever.

 

[MathMan]

AMD is saving people from being locked to one hardware vendor with a gsync monitor. That's a good thing not a negative. The monitors are coming, and soon.

If Nvidia decides to not support FreeSync monitors, you end up in exactly the same situation: a virtual AMD lock-in.
Not the fault of AMD, but the end result is the same.

Long story short if you love nvidia products go buy yourself a gsync monitor with a mediocre resolution and questionable display quality, just don't be surprised when its obsolete in 1-3 years.

What makes you think GSYNC monitors have an inherently worse?

I don't know if you noticed, but right now the only 144Hz 2560x1440 monitor in the world is GSYNC.

Or do you think FreeSync will magically make IPS at 144Hz possible?

 

[jackstar7]

Unless something drastic happens in the next month on both FreeSync and Radeon, yes I am.

Also, there's no guarantee FreeSync will be cheaper at retail. None whatsoever.

I didn't say there was such a guarantee. All we have is what is on the market now in the locations that actually have them (or pre-orders), and the prices are thus far not compelling to me to buy new monitor and GPU. I expect price premiums similar to what is seen in the market for 144hz monitors and other premium features. I do hope it is less costly than the perceived cost of g-sync though.

It sounds like you are in the right place to upgrade both components, so why wait? Why not get a solid nV GPU now and then the monitor when available? Meh. I'm not telling you how to spend your money... just curious why you'd hold off waiting for a tech product that shows no signs to you of actually competing with what already exists.

 

[Eymar]

If GSYNC is technically superior, as high-end fan you don't want to see GSYNC disappear. Just be a high end niche feature like lightboost\3D. However, I see adaptive sync benefiting the low end as well so there is a good reason to believe that adoption rate by monitor manufacturers should be good. Definitely could see MS and Intel implementing VESA adaptive-sync for power savings feature for static screens(be a good feature for touchscreens since don't need a cursor to be displayed so can keep homescreen static), video playback and screensavers (ie. drop refresh to 20hz).

 

[Spanners]

The reasoning behind thinking it will rests on several assumptions:

• A-Sync will be in every DP1.2a/DP1.3 compliant monitor
• A-Sync will not add to monitor production cost, as it will be part of the normal upgrades that display manufacturers acquire from ASIC manufacturers
• A-Sync will not cause monitor manufacturers to add a price premium
• A-Sync will work with every GPU

Every single one of these assumptions is wrong. Every single one:

• A-Sync is an optional part of the DP spec, not mandatory
• A-Sync will require significant hardware development and new components that weren't required previously (source: Asus)
• A-Sync, being optional and requiring additional hardware, will be targeted at a subset of the display population - when was the last time you saw a niche feature not have a price premium?
• A-Sync is just a component of variable refresh. Implementations of it are tied directly to the GPU, and even on just AMD's line, you can't use A-Sync on a R7 280. Nvidia won't support it at all.

These seem to be assumptions that you've put forward so you can debunk them, I've never seen AMD state any of this or really anyone. Please link me to where people are making all these incorrect assumptions. Also you seem to be calling AMD deceptive in a lot of your posts I'd appreciate if you could link me some of this deception.

 

[Eymar]

These seem to be assumptions that you've put forward so you can debunk them, I've never seen AMD state any of this or really anyone.

Haha, that is pretty funny if true( skimming this thread haven't seen any blatant examples). One assumption I question is that Nvidia won't support adaptive sync feature if monitor supports it. Why automatically give up the potential video card sale to AMD? Nvidia could have monitor advertise with a GSYNC compatible logo.

 

[Mand]

These seem to be assumptions that you've put forward so you can debunk them, I've never seen AMD state any of this or really anyone. Please link me to where people are making all these incorrect assumptions. Also you seem to be calling AMD deceptive in a lot of your posts I'd appreciate if you could link me some of this deception.

Use a forum search. I've been in just about all the FreeSync discussions since the beginning, I've seen all the arguments, and I did not make these up. These are things that people are convinced are true, but aren't.

 

[Mand]

It sounds like you are in the right place to upgrade both components, so why wait? Why not get a solid nV GPU now and then the monitor when available? Meh. I'm not telling you how to spend your money... just curious why you'd hold off waiting for a tech product that shows no signs to you of actually competing with what already exists.

The only reason I'm waiting is Maxwell and the ROG Swift. Doesn't make sense to buy a 700 series right now. ROG Swift should be here in 2-3 weeks, but won't do much good without a computer capable of running decently on it (which my current one isn't). But, until I actually pull the trigger, all options are still on the table.

Unless something huge happens in the next month on the AMD side, both with FreeSync and with Radeon, my next purchase will be Nvidia. Given how happy I was (and still am) with my current card I'm a little disappointed that they aren't nearly as appealing this time around. FreeSync is a big part of it, but I was also not really thrilled with their design choices on the R9 series. Running hot, loud, and hungry to get high performance doesn't appeal to me. One of the reasons I like my current card so much is that it managed to strike a nice balance. Being forced to get a third-party cooler solution to get reasonable temps on the R9s is not something I find encouraging about the overall design process.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

You are all very confused about my post based upon your apparent hatred of all things amd. Freesync is the term used to describe AMD's driver to drive an adaptive sync monitor which is based upon the VESA standard. Nvidia will eventually be supporting a VESA standard (adaptive sync) not an AMD driver (freesync) that you are all apparently confused about.

My comment about the quality and resolution still stands. Why buy a 1440p gsync monitor when 4k is coming? There will be 4k versions of gsync and adaptive sync. Buying 1440p now would be stupid when most users keep monitors for much longer than their other hardware.

Now finally on to Intel and arm. Why would they enter into a cross licensing agreement with nvidia setting themselves up for potential lawsuits later on if the deal goes south when they could just use the open VESA standard. Adaptive Sync's potential to reduce power usage is why I believe Intel and arm chip makers will support it. Anyone who can't see why they would care about that has not been paying attention for a long time.