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

[KingFatty]

It's very puzzling why AMD wouldn't just produce a demo to demonstrate the tech. Do they want to invite speculation/FUD?

 

[AtenRa]

The scope of the first demos was to show that the technology is working with current hardware. It was not meant to be a demo of the final product capabilities.

 

[96Firebird]

I'm hoping the samples next month will show us what we, as gamers, want to see.

 

[Mand]

It's very puzzling why AMD wouldn't just produce a demo to demonstrate the tech. Do they want to invite speculation/FUD?

Very clearly, yes they do. Even the name FreeSync is quite obviously a dig at Nvidia.

They want you to not get G-Sync. They got caught with their pants down and have no product to compete with it, and so they're choosing to smear and deceive instead of compete.





You think this will make your point?

Stop with the inflammatory posting.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[VulgarDisplay]

The scope of the first demos was to show that the technology is working with current hardware. It was not meant to be a demo of the final product capabilities.

Not sure why we bother trying to explain this. They aren't interested in the tech. They are just here to talk bad about amd.






Keep it on topic. Stop with the threadcrapping.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[Mand]

The scope of the first demos was to show that the technology is working with current hardware. It was not meant to be a demo of the final product capabilities.

And the first demo did not show that the technology is working with current hardware. Not in any regard. That's the problem.

They claimed it showed the tech is working, to the point where you believe that's what the demo showed. Only, the demo didn't show that, at all.

Your crappy monitor refresh rate cannot synchronize with your GPU fps output. Their Demo DID and that is evidence Freesync is working using current technology and hardware.
Granted they only did that at a steady fps rate, but the technology is working.
They also have said that more prototypes will be available in September so lets just wait and see what those prototypes can do.

You're right, my crappy monitor can't do that. Here's the thing: neither did their demo. Their demo DID NOT. They claimed it did, but it didn't show that. What it did show is that they were running a fixed fps, and that if you match your fixed display refresh rate to that fixed fps the video looks better. True, it looks better, but it's also not synchronized variable refresh, which is what G-Sync does and what they claimed the demo was doing.

 

[Mand]

Not sure why we bother trying to explain this. They aren't interested in the tech. They are just here to talk bad about amd.

We're bothering to explain it because you still don't understand that they didn't show what they claimed to show, and instead showed something completely different and not at all related to what they were claiming to show.

It's not "talking bad about AMD" if what AMD did is actually legitimately bad. That's called a truthful discussion.







Keep it on topic. Stop with the threadcrapping.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[AtenRa]

And the first demo did not show that the technology is working with current hardware. Not in any regard. That's the problem.

They claimed it showed the tech is working, to the point where you believe that's what the demo showed. Only, the demo didn't show that, at all.



You're right, my crappy monitor can't do that. Here's the thing: neither did their demo. Their demo DID NOT. They claimed it did, but it didn't show that. What it did show is that they were running a fixed fps, and that if you match your fixed display refresh rate to that fixed fps the video looks better. True, it looks better, but it's also not synchronized variable refresh, which is what G-Sync does and what they claimed the demo was doing.

Either you are trolling or you dont understand what synchronizing the Monitor Refresh Rate (Hz) to GPUs fps output is.
As i have said, they DID synchronized the Monitor refresh rate to a steady fps rate of 50fps. That was made using current technology and hardware(Toshiba Satellite Click notebooks).
The faster you will understand this the better for you and the rest of the forum.

 

[96Firebird]

We're bothering to explain it because you still don't understand that they didn't show what they claimed to show, and instead showed something completely different and not at all related to what they were claiming to show.

It's not "talking bad about AMD" if what AMD did is actually legitimately bad. That's called a truthful discussion.

Not sure why you bother explaining that. He isn't interested in the tech. He is just here to defend AMD's mishandling of the whole thing.

:awe:





Stop with this line of discussion.

"He is just here to defend AMD's mishandling of the whole thing."

You're threadcrapping. Deal with the topic being discussed and stop attacking the posters.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[Leadbox]

We're bothering to explain it because you still don't understand that they didn't show what they claimed to show, and instead showed something completely different and not at all related to what they were claiming to show.

It's not "talking bad about AMD" if what AMD did is actually legitimately bad. That's called a truthful discussion.

Where is your proof that they didn't show what they claimed, that they were v-syncing some arbitrary #hz? Sounds to me like you're merely inferring that from the lack of an fps counter or do you have more?

 

[96Firebird]

Either you are trolling or you dont understand what synchronizing the Monitor Refresh Rate (Hz) to GPUs fps output is.
As i have said, they DID synchronized the Monitor refresh rate to a steady fps rate of 50fps. That was made using current technology and hardware(Toshiba Satellite Click notebooks).
The faster you will understand this the better for you and the rest of the forum.

And why does any of this matter? Why should I care that they synchronized at a steady 50FPS with current hardware?

 

[AtenRa]

And why does any of this matter? Why should I care that they synchronized at a steady 50FPS with current hardware?

I have already explained.

The scope of the first demos was to show that the technology is working with current hardware. It was not meant to be a demo of the final product capabilities.

 

[96Firebird]

Why do I care that they did it with current hardware?

Obviously they need to release new hardware for Free-Sync, so why demo on limited current hardware?

They showed part of the technology is working, but not the part that people care about.

 

[Despoiler]

Either you are trolling or you dont understand what synchronizing the Monitor Refresh Rate (Hz) to GPUs fps output is.
As i have said, they DID synchronized the Monitor refresh rate to a steady fps rate of 50fps. That was made using current technology and hardware(Toshiba Satellite Click notebooks).
The faster you will understand this the better for you and the rest of the forum.

I've been explaining this to him since the video released. He doesn't get it. He claims they set 50hz v-sync on the monitor on the right. If they did that it would look like the monitor on the on the left where the frame time (number next to fps in parentheses) is static @ 33.3Xms. It only changes from 33.34ms to 33.36ms and very slowly. That frame time number for all intents and purposes being static = v-sync. The monitor on the right is rendering at 49.XX fps, but the frame time number is fluctuating constantly @ 20.XXms. The only issue with this demo is that it's too simple. The rendering isn't complex enough to show large swings in FPS and is also true on the second demo. This was confirmed by the media when discussing the second demo with AMD.

 

[AtenRa]

Why do I care that they did it with current hardware?

Obviously they need to release new hardware for Free-Sync, so why demo on limited current hardware?

They showed part of the technology is working, but not the part that people care about.

We care that it is working on current hardware because that means we dont need extra hardware for the technology to work, elevating the cost of the monitor to higher prices. Obviously Monitor OEMs will charge a little extra for the new Freesync monitors but not high as NV G-sync.

Also, Adaptive-sync is available for Intel and NVIDIA to use since it is an open standard.

 

[sontin]

"This technology" exists since 2009 and it's called PSR.

G-Sync on the other hand is the only form of adaptive-sync which has been proved to be working.

It's very simple: If "this technology" would have existed before G-Sync you could show us a video of it. Otherwise all the claims about Freesync are simple based on G-Sync...

 

[96Firebird]

We care that it is working on current hardware because that means we dont need extra hardware for the technology to work, elevating the cost of the monitor to higher prices.

If that is the case, why didn't they show us variable FPS in their demos?

 

[AtenRa]

I've been explaining this to him since the video released. He doesn't get it. He claims they set 50hz v-sync on the monitor on the right. If they did that it would look like the monitor on the on the left where the frame time (number next to fps in parentheses) is static @ 33.3Xms. It only changes from 33.34ms to 33.36ms and very slowly. That frame time number for all intents and purposes being static = v-sync. The monitor on the right is rendering at 49.XX fps, but the frame time number is fluctuating constantly @ 20.XXms. The only issue with this demo is that it's too simple. The rendering isn't complex enough to show large swings in FPS and is also true on the second demo. This was confirmed by the media when discussing the second demo with AMD.

Yes it seams to me he didnt understand what synchronizing fps to Hz is.

 

[AtenRa]

If that is the case, why didn't they show us variable FPS in their demos?

Im not AMD representative to answer why they only show that or the other, give me a break.

We have the demos, we can see what they have and we wait for more, simple as that.

 

[96Firebird]

Im not AMD representative to answer why they only show that or the other, give me a break.

We have the demos, we can see what they have and we wait for more, simple as that.

Haha, you did well. Next question, who shot JFK?

But really, since your posts are just your opinion, why do you think they haven't demoed variable FPS yet?

 

[Abwx]

"This technology" exists since 2009 and it's called PSR.

G-Sync on the other hand is the only form of adaptive-sync which has been proved to be working.

It's very simple: If "this technology" would have existed before G-Sync you could show us a video of it. Otherwise all the claims about Freesync are simple based on G-Sync...

If it didnt already exist Nvidia would had no use of an added board in the panel, it s just that they couldnt use the GPU display engine and still implement a proprietary solution, because using the display engine to control a variable rate has already been patented years ago by ATI and parts of this patent are already used in eDP...

 

[BrightCandle]

The press told us they didn't demonstrate a changing frequency. Pcper.com reported on it at the time as did a few others. Indeed in the original CES video from January you can see its got a fixed 50 fps frame counter in the corner, you can see for yourself that its not varying at all. What they demonstrate is that this monitor running at 50hz running a 50fps demo looks decent, but there is nothing inherient about most monitors that means they must run 60hz, infact with a lot of monitors you can happily create a custom resolution and refresh lower than their maximum (with an Nvidia card and drivers).

So of course that demo was possible on an existing monitor, a lot of monitors can do that. Under the hood they might have been doing PSR or adjusting the refresh rate, we just don't know that for certain because the demo itself was achievable in other ways and AMD hasn't told us how they did it.

So then they showed another demo, and this one had no frame counter on it, but they did have another monitor running at 60hz for comparison. Again we saw press reports that it was a fix refresh rate but that this time AMD had said it was using PSR but with waits for the vblanks. So it still wasn't doing what was necessary to run a game with varying refresh (and indeed AMD hasn't shown the tech running a game, or a 24 hz video or anything like that).

Unfortunately this just isn't a disputable fact, we have multiple media reports saying these things. Hopefully with the samples we'll see something genuine and some details about how it works, but so far all we have really been shown is some smoke and mirrors unfortunately.

 

[jackstar7]

Haha, you did well. Next question, who shot JFK?

But really, since your posts are just your opinion, why do you think they haven't demoed variable FPS yet?

Hardware limitations.

 

[Abwx]

Hopefully with the samples we'll see something genuine and some details about how it works,

NEWARK, CA (12 May 2014) — The Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA®) today announced the addition of Adaptive-Sync to its popular DisplayPort 1.2a video interface standard.


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.

http://techreport.com/news/26451/adaptive-sync-added-to-displayport-spec

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Haha, you did well. Next question, who shot JFK?

But really, since your posts are just your opinion, why do you think they haven't demoed variable FPS yet?

They haven't demoed variable refresh rates yet because it's not ready. They did however hint that we will be seeing this in September.

The whole point of their demo with the laptop screens was to use vblank to change the refresh rate of their monitor to match the FPS being displayed and PROVE THEIR CONCEPT.

We just have to wait for the final implementation to appear. That demo took place before VESA even finalized the official spec for adaptive-sync. I don't understand the outrage over what AMD showed.