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

[richaron]

All these secret companies he cant mention again.

From post history I understand it's impossible for you to post anything positive related to AMD. But why do you think anyone will refuse to implement Displayport standards (on which Freesync is based)?

Warning issued for inflammatory language.
-- stahlhart

 

[ShintaiDK]

From post history I understand it's impossible for you to post anything positive related to AMD. But why do you think anyone will refuse to implement Displayport standards (on which Freesync is based)?

For 10-20$ (That may end up as much more) extra? Hell yes. It may end up as "gaming monitors" only with a good premium.

 

[Mand]

From post history I understand it's impossible for you to post anything positive related to AMD. But why do you think anyone will refuse to implement Displayport standards (on which Freesync is based)?

You do realize Adaptive Sync is not a mandatory part of the DP 1.2a spec, right?

 

[richaron]

For 10-20$ (That may end up as much more) extra? Hell yes. It may end up as "gaming monitors" only with a good premium.

There was a "why" in my question. Is the amswer $10-20 more BOM (due to more hardware &/or R&D)? Or is the answer product differentiation?

Either way: see every technology product ever, upgrades/updates and so forth.

 

[jackstar7]

I'm hostile toward anyone who lies to me and thinks I'm too dumb to notice.

Taking it personally is probably the right move.

You never consider that they know you're too savvy to be fooled by them? AMD might totally respect you. Seems like you just assume the worst.

Hopefully AMD-synch can meet the nV-synch standard that's out there, but hopefully with broader options in the market.

 

[Spanners]

You do realize Adaptive Sync is not a mandatory part of the DP 1.2a spec, right?

It's fairly obvious he does understand that, it would be hard to refuse to implement something that's mandatory wouldn't it?

 

[Mand]

It's fairly obvious he does understand that, it would be hard to refuse to implement something that's mandatory wouldn't it?

No, because I've seen a lot of people saying things like "it will be in every monitor because they will want to be DP1.2a/DP1.3 compliant!"

Except, not, because they could ignore Adaptive Sync completely and still be compliant.

The misperception that this is going to be an assumed part of DP moving forward, that all monitors will have it, that it's just the normal cost of getting a monitor, that is the truly biggest lingering result of AMD's deception. None of it has any basis in reality.

 

[Elfear]

Keep it civil and discuss the topic without getting personal. Don't get another thread shutdown because you can't interact without being confrontational.

-Elfear

 

[ShintaiDK]

There was a "why" in my question. Is the amswer $10-20 more BOM (due to more hardware &/or R&D)? Or is the answer product differentiation?

Either way: see every technology product ever, upgrades/updates and so forth.

Talking about the BOM, there is also a small caverat. He doesnt mention volume, the editions or time for the BOM to hit 10-20$. Not to mention the other costs that comes on top. So in short Huddy doesnt know. And to reach 10-20$ it may require a massive volume and even then only be for the entry part with video. Remember, GSync suffers exactly that. It could cost a lot less, if the volume was there. As in sub 40$ instead of its current 250-300$ price tag or whatever it cost today.

 

[richaron]

No, because I've seen a lot of people saying things like "it will be in every monitor because they will want to be DP1.2a/DP1.3 compliant!"

Except, not, because they could ignore Adaptive Sync completely and still be compliant.

The misperception that this is going to be an assumed part of DP moving forward, that all monitors will have it, that it's just the normal cost of getting a monitor, that is the truly biggest lingering result of AMD's deception. None of it has any basis in reality.

One could also argue a GPU supporting "1080p" monitors are optional. Or it could be argued supporting Directx itself is optional.

Extreme examples of course, but go to show how persuasive the "optional" argument can be. I'll stand by what I've said above.

 

[Spanners]

No, because I've seen a lot of people saying things like "it will be in every monitor because they will want to be DP1.2a/DP1.3 compliant!"

Except, not, because they could ignore Adaptive Sync completely and still be compliant.

The misperception that this is going to be an assumed part of DP moving forward, that all monitors will have it, that it's just the normal cost of getting a monitor, that is the truly biggest lingering result of AMD's deception. None of it has any basis in reality.

No? I'm sure people have misconceptions about many things, but all I meant to imply was that you can't refuse something that's mandatory therefore he understood it wasn't.

Did AMD incorrectly state that it was a mandatory part of the DP standard? None of the marketing/faq material I've read said this. If I'm wrong then apologies in advance.

"While AMD cannot possibly guarantee that "every monitor" will adopt Project FreeSync in time, we do believe that this approach is best to achieve wide industry support."

 

[Flapdrol1337]

For sale next year, are we talking 5 months or 16?

 

[rgallant]

I'll wait for monitors that have both.
no way I'll buy a nv only lock in for a $800 monitor.
-what if amd can launch a year before gm200 on 20nm from gf ?
no 20nm for 2014 also could mean jan-2015 shipping for amd.

 

[gorobei]

For sale next year, are we talking 5 months or 16?

based on some prior interviews with huddy, they are supposed to be coming out jan 2015.

given that i still cant find any native gsync monitors available in the US from any of the big name retailers(newegg, amazon, tiger, etc) this is a decent timeframe.

we are at ~10months since nvidia demoed gsync and still no retail availability in the US. amd showed the laptop freesync proof of concept on jan2014 so 12 months to retail product is quite a feat.

 

[Mand]

No? I'm sure people have misconceptions about many things, but all I meant to imply was that you can't refuse something that's mandatory therefore he understood it wasn't.

Did AMD incorrectly state that it was a mandatory part of the DP standard? None of the marketing/faq material I've read said this. If I'm wrong then apologies in advance.

"While AMD cannot possibly guarantee that "every monitor" will adopt Project FreeSync in time, we do believe that this approach is best to achieve wide industry support."

The point I was making is that the people who don't understand that it's not mandatory use its allegedly mandatory nature as evidence that nobody could possibly not adopt it, which isn't true.

AMD has been vague on the subject. On one hand, they do clearly state that they're working with hardware partners - which implies less-than-universal adoption. On the other hand, they made a MUCH MUCH bigger deal hyping up the "free and open" and "no new hardware" and "just requires a firmware update" lines - which tells a very different story.

 

[Eymar]

Surprising since lightboost monitors took at most a few months for pretty good retail availability. Hopefully not the case with freesync monitors due to cheaper hardware implementation.

 

[Abwx]

So in short Huddy doesnt know. And to reach 10-20$ it may require a massive volume and even then only be for the entry part with video.

He do know and the 10-20$ figure is really a maximum...at the consumer level.

He knows that manufacturers will wait for the next gen of panels asics to implement the new functionalities, this way it cost about nothing since it s included on periodical chips updates, and big volumes are inherent anyway.

 

[HurleyBird]

The fanboyism is strong in this thread.

Warning issued for thread crapping.
-- stahlhart

 

[Fastx]

AMD New Products Announcements on 8-23-2014

http://videocardz.com/51239/amd-celebrate-30-years-graphics-gaming-live-webcast

 

[Silverforce11]

It's a little creepy to get so much hate when all it is, is they are finally declaring a release date for FS monitors as early next year.

I don't understand the hurt. Help me understand.

 

[gorobei]

It's a little creepy to get so much hate when all it is, is they are finally declaring a release date for FS monitors as early next year.

I don't understand the hurt. Help me understand.

i've posted the reason in the other FS threads, but they keep getting locked for some reason. so for the umpteenth time:

GS is in a perilous situation (corporate beancounter-wise). vendors need to order enough GS control units to justify the millions of dollars required for NV to fab an asic GS chip. if they cant get enough consumer interest to persuade the vendors, then GS will die on the vine.

If vesa's adaptive sync is a default standard in the long term as eventually all low end display controllers enable it, the vendors are more inclined to play a waiting game to see who comes out on top. This waiting threatens adoption of GS, as you need wide level enthusiasm to convince vendors to buy in.

if FS performs well enough, or if intel decides to jump into the mix with their own version using vesa-AS; not enough vendors are going to bother with GS to justify the asic expenditure or a $200 premium for the fpga version.

its pretty silly as it probably wouldnt be that hard for nv to make something to work with AS.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Intel will support this standard simply because it was part of an idea created to save power.

That's the main reason why adoption of this by controller manufacturers will be high, it can reduce power consumption. You don't need to waste energy refreshing the screen when there is nothing new to display.

 

[Sheninat0r]

There's no way FreeSync is vaporware. It might be late, but AMD isn't stupid enough to hype something up this much and then fail to deliver in such a spectacular manner. They've been saying since the start that late 2014 to early 2015 is the target date for FreeSync retail availability, and I think in the worst case they'll make late 2015. The lack of announced partners, poor communication, lack of/conflicting information about the technology, and overall mysteriousness of the circumstances are certainly not encouraging, I will definitely agree -- but still, I'd fully expect to see at least one functional FreeSync monitor "next year", even if that means 2H.

 

[blastingcap]

There's no way FreeSync is vaporware. It might be late, but AMD isn't stupid enough to hype something up this much and then fail to deliver in such a spectacular manner.

Have you ever heard of Bulldozer?

 

[3DVagabond]

Have you ever heard of Bulldozer?

Completely different management.