Truth about G-Sync ? - its a Adaptive-Sync with an Altera Security FPGAs

[loccothan]

"Basically, what NVIDIA is trying to force you to do is to buy their Module license while using VESA Adaptive-Sync Technology !.
Let’s be more clear. CUDA was made to force the developers to work on a NVIDIA GPU instead of an AMD GPU.
The reason is that, if CUDA was capable to be used more widely, like DirectCompute or OpenCL, CUDA will certainly work better on AMD GPU.
This is not good for NVIDIA, and the same goes for PhysX that could work on AMD GPU (actually working on CPU and NVIDIA GPU only).

NVIDIA wants to dominate the GPU segment !!
and they are ready to close everything they made and this is not good at all. Always lying to their customers and to the developers.
The main problem here is that NVIDIA doesn’t like standard, so they always make licenses for each of their
products and win a lot of Royalties.

Freesync on AMD = Adaptive-Sync like G-Sync

Back to the G-sync.

Why the modded drivers can make the G-sync work ? The answer is : Bypassing the G-sync Module requirement.
Like I said G-sync is a Licensed Adaptive-Sync by NVIDIA. The G-sync Module was
never needed but NVIDIA needs to sell a License to make more money.
What is the G-sync Module ?
A PCB with an Altera FPGAs core, why ? This’ the reason why NVIDIA uses Altera - Altera Security FPGAs
Basically the NVIDIA drivers control
everything between the G-sync Module and the Geforce GPU. The truth is
that the G-sync Module does nothing else than confirm that the module is right here.

Which Monitors are compatible with the G-sync Modded Drivers ?

All the external monitors that include DP 1.2 (past 2010) and all the Laptops that include eDP.
Example :
Yamakasi, Crossover, Dell, Asus (for example PB278Q), etc and MSI, Alienware, Asus, etc Laptop.
Which Geforce GPUs are compatible ?
Starting from G6xx to G9xx including mobile versions.

Hopefully this clear statement helps you to understand how the G-sync really works."

Its not mine revelation -> here is Full Article -> http://gamenab.net/2015/01/26/truth...using-vesa-adaptive-sync-technology-freesync/

 

[ShintaiDK]

So by the same time you are saying that Freesync is a complete hoax and DP1.2a is an utter lie and we dont need new scalars. Just because someone hacked some drivers to show something else in the GUI?

 

[chimaxi83]

Nice source :sneaky: If this is even true, company A makes something proprietary so that they could profit from it, while making company B come up with their own solution? What's wrong with a business doing that?

 

[JoeRambo]

So by the same time you are saying that Freesync is a complete hoax and DP1.2a is an utter lie and we dont need new scalars. Just because someone hacked some drivers to show something else in the GUI?

I'd suggest checking things out before posting, esp that 240 fps video download. Either Gsync test app is rigged to show Gsync in splendid colors or the hack is actually working.

 

[MarkLuvsCS]

Why did he choose to record the actual g-sync demo with a stupid cell phone? He said he recorded the latest process of him installing at 240 fps.

The g-sync demo didn't look different at any of the settings. They all seemed to have tearing so aside from all the drivers thinking g-sync is on, it definitely doesn't appear to be actually working. The screen tearing is noticeable when the pendulum is swinging.

 

[loccothan]

I dont know why NVIDIA uses Altera - Altera Security FPGAs ?
Interesting thing ? Hmm ?

 

[ShintaiDK]

I'd suggest checking things out before posting, esp that 240 fps video download. Either Gsync test app is rigged to show Gsync in splendid colors or the hack is actually working.

I did, and it shows nothing that confirms it. The movie is directly horrible, skipping and jumping around. Its certainly not recorded in 240fps.

 

[JoeRambo]

The g-sync demo didn't look different at any of the settings. They all seemed to have tearing so aside from all the drivers thinking g-sync is on, it definitely doesn't appear to be actually working. The screen tearing is noticeable when the pendulum is swinging.

Ha, i watched it on 2412M on WMP and I get what you mean

To properly watch that video, you need either 120hz monitor + proper media player ( i use windows media player classic ) or proper media player and speed set to 1/4 or so, because 240fps is too beaucup.

 

[AnandThenMan]

I don't think the module is completely dead weight, but could Nvidia incorporate the functionality into their GPU's (assuming it's even needed) simply, yea I think they could. Now going by NV's history of this kind of thing it would not surprise me at all if the G-Sync module was 95% about exclusion.

 

[JoeRambo]

I did, and it shows nothing that confirms it. The movie is directly horrible, skipping and jumping around. Its certainly not recorded in 240fps.

Are we talking about "IMG_0152.MOV" file, 550megs, downloaded? Just run it 0.25x/0.5x speed and you will see clear differences.

 

[bystander36]

The monitors sold with G-sync modules would not have had the capability for this hacked driver. What this does show, is that Nvidia can make A-sync work without changes to their GPU's. At least with the 980m.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Are we talking about "IMG_0152.MOV" file, 550megs, downloaded? Just run it 0.25x/0.5x speed and you will see clear differences.

I wonder if its a codec thing. When I watch it, nomatter the speed. The pendule is just showing 3-4 frames or so in a swing from one side to the other.

But again:

All the external monitors that include DP 1.2 (past 2010) and all the Laptops that include eDP.
Example :
Yamakasi, Crossover, Dell, Asus (for example PB278Q), etc and MSI, Alienware, Asus, etc Laptop.

So what they say is, DP1.2a and the VESA spec is not needed. AMDs freesync should work as well and not need new scalars?

It just doesnt add up.

 

[bystander36]

The monitors sold with G-sync modules would not have had the capability for this hacked driver. What this does show, is that Nvidia can make A-sync work without changes to their GPU's. At least with the 980m.

I also would add, this also shows that with hacked drivers, A-sync monitors should be usable on Nvidia cards.

 

[SolMiester]

Nice source :sneaky: If this is even true, company A makes something proprietary so that they could profit from it, while making company B come up with their own solution? What's wrong with a business doing that?

+1
Edit - I dont think AMD does proprietary because they haven't come up with anything before the other team that anyone wanted, except maybe Mantle, but that's like died! There is no money in open tech, only R&D costs.

 

[AnandThenMan]

I also would add, this also shows that with hacked drivers, A-sync monitors should be usable on Nvidia cards.

Yep, but will Nvidia lock out this possibility in the driver so you have to buy a G-Sync branded display?

 

[ShintaiDK]

I also would add, this also shows that with hacked drivers, A-sync monitors should be usable on Nvidia cards.

Actually A-sync monitors isnt needed is what they say. So you should be able to hack AMDs drivers for the same result on older monitors.

Assuming the result is true.

And thats where it just doesnt hang together.

 

[Elixer]

Of course it is better to use open technology vs proprietary.

Yes, Nvidia does have a habit of using proprietary things...just like Apple.
People still buy them, so, they have no reason not to do what they have been doing, until people vote with their wallet.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Yep, but will Nvidia lock out this possibility in the driver so you have to buy a G-Sync branded display?

Until a winner is established or both fail and there's a universal standard, probably yes.

 

[bystander36]

Yep, but will Nvidia lock out this possibility in the driver so you have to buy a G-Sync branded display?

Like I said, hacked drivers. With hacked drivers, you can circumvent that sort of restriction. They did it with PhysX in the past. Of course, someone has to figure out how to hack them, and find a way to hack it every time they release new drivers. Whether someone will go through the trouble for everyone is another story.

 

[bystander36]

Actually A-sync monitors isnt needed is what they say. So you should be able to hack AMDs drivers for the same result on older monitors.

Assuming the result is true.

And thats where it just doesnt hang together.

I thought they only got this to work on eDP displays, which have similar tech to what the A-sync displays have. Other monitors don't have it.

 

[AnandThenMan]

Until a winner is established or both fail and there's a universal standard, probably yes.

There already is an officially adopted universal standard. It's most often Nvidia's modus operandi not to use the more consumer friendly approach, open standard approach.

Like I said, hacked drivers. With hacked drivers, you can circumvent that sort of restriction. They did it with PhysX in the past.

Don't get me wrong I can see the drivers being hacked, but a hacked up solution is often not all that popular. I've used the PhysX hacked drivers before but most people won't bother.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I thought they only got this to work on eDP displays, which have similar tech to what the A-sync displays have. Other monitors don't have it.

But thats not what they write.

Which Monitors are compatible with the G-sync Modded Drivers ?

All the external monitors that include DP 1.2 (past 2010) and all the Laptops that include eDP.
Example :
Yamakasi, Crossover, Dell, Asus (for example PB278Q)

So either both nVidia and AMD is full of lies. Or its gamenab thats full of it.

 

[Erenhardt]

Didn't amd state that freesync is working with some exisiting monitors, and showcased it first time with and mobile display that was already on market.
The big thing back then was they will not need additional hardware. Some changes to the existing one could make it compatible. That is how I remember it.

For now, I will hold my judge and let nv take a stance on the matter.

 

[Grooveriding]

Well nvidia stated before that one of the things the FPGA was needed for was colour correction to compare one frame to the next and that was part of the reason for the buffer. Now that we have seen that gsync works just using a compatible adaptive sync tcon we know that was bs.

They also said they would not support adaptive sync, yet we see them supporting it on that laptop and calling it gsync, more bs.

Can't really believe anything nvidia says after falsifying the gtx 970 specs, so it's hard to know if the module is completely useless or not. Right now it looks as if the module is all but useless, maybe that will change.

 

[bystander36]

Well nvidia stated before that one of the things the FPGA was needed for was colour correction to compare one frame to the next and that was part of the reason for the buffer. Now that we have seen that gsync works just using a compatible adaptive sync tcon we know that was bs.

That isn't necessarily BS. It might be an advantage to G-sync if A-syc/freedsync doesn't to it. However, I think part or all of the color correction stuff was related to ULMB mode.