Phynaz
Lifer
Adaptive-Sync added to DisplayPort spec
http://techreport.com/news/26451/adaptive-sync-added-to-displayport-spec
G-Sync is dead.
http://techreport.com/news/26451/adaptive-sync-added-to-displayport-spec
G-Sync is dead.
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
VESA Adopts Adaptive-Sync
- Thread starter Phynaz
- Start date
- Status
G-Sync is not dead. Adding variable refresh to the DP spec does not magically conjure up the hardware to make it actually happen. That will take significant development time, equal to at least what has been done for G-Sync.
The difference is that nobody's actually announced that they're moving forward with implementing it. Not AMD, not display manufacturers, nobody.
G-Sync is not dead, and claiming that it is is nothing more than propaganda. This part in particular stands out:
It doesn't matter whether VESA was persuaded otherwise, G-Sync works now, with existing, non-updated DisplayPort, using the same VBLANK-extension style of variable refresh. For TechReport to talk about it in this way is a major journalistic error. The author of this article has no idea what the VESA spec actually does.
Enough with the propaganda and spin that people swallowed wholesale from AMD - despite it being thoroughly debunked by follow-up reporting - and now keep repeating as if it were the truth.
Last edited:
Phynaz
Lifer
How much you want to bet Nvidia drops G-Sync like a hot potato?
What makes you think people will pay $130 for Nvidia's proprietary implementation when the standards based implementation will essentially be free?
Show me even one shred of evidence that the "standards-based implementation" will be free.
What it will require is for a display manufacturer to develop new hardware, specifically a new variable-refresh capable timing controller. Why would they give you that for free?
The burden is on AMD to prove that it's going to be free. When pressed in the days after the CES announcement, they backpedaled and admitted that no existing hardware for desktop monitors supported it and that display manufacturers would have to develop it first, and that their goal with the standards-based approach was designed to "encourage" them to do so. Which directly contradicts their earlier claim that it would require "no new expensive hardware." In other words, they were lying through their teeth at the announcement. But because people love to hate Red/Green as applicable, and love to hate being charged for things, people bought it hook line and sinker.
So, I ask you this: do you have a shred of evidence that it will be free, anything at all?
And before you ask, I have an AMD card, not Nvidia.
What it will require is for a display manufacturer to develop new hardware, specifically a new variable-refresh capable timing controller. Why would they give you that for free?
The burden is on AMD to prove that it's going to be free. When pressed in the days after the CES announcement, they backpedaled and admitted that no existing hardware for desktop monitors supported it and that display manufacturers would have to develop it first, and that their goal with the standards-based approach was designed to "encourage" them to do so. Which directly contradicts their earlier claim that it would require "no new expensive hardware." In other words, they were lying through their teeth at the announcement. But because people love to hate Red/Green as applicable, and love to hate being charged for things, people bought it hook line and sinker.
So, I ask you this: do you have a shred of evidence that it will be free, anything at all?
And before you ask, I have an AMD card, not Nvidia.
Last edited:
BrightCandle
Diamond Member
Nvidia's had purchasable gsync monitors in the market for 4 months now. The first AOC monitors just got released and we are expecting monitors from other makers over the next few months. Freesync is a year away, we have zero announcements from manufacturers, its not even paper launched yet.
Everytime I see AMD say this I cringe a little bit. The technologies are based on the same premise and AMD requires that special hardware be built into the monitors to support Freesync. Nvidia is providing this for the monitor manfacturers and AMD isn't, its a fundamental difference in approach but there is the advantage that Nvidia made a market by building the hardware. Doesn't mean it will always work that way, but since the monitor companies don't have this technology on the desktop and haven't done this for themselves so far it seems only sensible to help them get products made. Its disingenuous to downplay the need for special hardware to support this on "freesync" because its seriously misleading.
I think gsync is too expensive, no doubt about it. $200 for a FPCGA is a bad solution frankly. It ought to be $50 or less even at this stage and in the end it will needs to be marginal cost. But I don't see how Freesync can be much cheaper as its got the same problems and needs similar hardware.
Everytime I see AMD say this I cringe a little bit. The technologies are based on the same premise and AMD requires that special hardware be built into the monitors to support Freesync. Nvidia is providing this for the monitor manfacturers and AMD isn't, its a fundamental difference in approach but there is the advantage that Nvidia made a market by building the hardware. Doesn't mean it will always work that way, but since the monitor companies don't have this technology on the desktop and haven't done this for themselves so far it seems only sensible to help them get products made. Its disingenuous to downplay the need for special hardware to support this on "freesync" because its seriously misleading.
I think gsync is too expensive, no doubt about it. $200 for a FPCGA is a bad solution frankly. It ought to be $50 or less even at this stage and in the end it will needs to be marginal cost. But I don't see how Freesync can be much cheaper as its got the same problems and needs similar hardware.
Last edited:
Because it is much cheaper than to buy a new graphics card. Freesync is only supported by GCN 1.1 gpus. Even one of the latest rebrands like r9 270x doesnt support it unlike a GTX750 andG-Sync. :sneaky:
Last edited:
Midwayman
Diamond Member
LOL not like the hardware for gsync really exists in the market yet either. The free sync stuff will take a little while to roll out, but once it does it will be game over. As for not needing a standard update, you're missing the subtext there. *Not needed if we add a really expensive custom chip to take advantage of the existing standard. So, yes he's technically right you can do it with the existing cards and cables. He's not right in that a monitor can just be randomly told to adjust vblank and it'll work. I'm not sure why team green is getting all worked up about this. Its a good thing for everyone. It means your favorite monitor is much more likely to support it and without having to pay a premium.
96Firebird
Diamond Member
Can't wait to see the reviews comparing the two technologies. Wonder how they stack up against each other.
And LOL at the monitors with the new standard being "free".
And LOL at the monitors with the new standard being "free".
"Free" as in "free speech" NOT "free beer" :awe:
A lot of people are waiting on better than TN panels before jumping onto G-sync this looks like even more reason to wait
Then there's this bit:
Yes it does...
No, that's not what AMD said. They said "Free" as in "does not require expensive hardware" - aka "free beer." Free as in "free speech" is an invention of AMD's internet defenders who aren't paying attention to what AMD is actually saying.
MisterLilBig
Senior member
Guess which Intel iGPU's and every other GPU manufacturer will support?
Not G-sync.
Not G-sync.
It's not dead. Copypasta from one tech site to another tech site does not a death certificate make.
The points you quoted are all still valid. Just because a lot of people got suckered by AMD does not mean they're right. Why? Simple:
Adaptive sync still requires new hardware, that doesn't yet exist.
AMD stated that they were letting display manufacturers develop the hardware.
Development of the hardware will take time and money, and we as consumers will have to pay for it.
G-Sync exists now, on the previous DisplayPort spec, and since they both use vblank modification the spec is not necessary
And, most importantly,
Updating the DisplayPort spec does not mean that all monitors will magically be able to use it. This is an --OPTION-- that the spec will now support. Expect to pay for it when a display manufacturer comes out with new hardware.
Last edited:
As someone very familiar with the technology involved in HMDs, Rift needs all the help it can get. Variable refresh would be a very big deal for it.
blastingcap
Diamond Member
I expect EVERYONE to pay for it instead of just a handful of Gsync adopters. If every monitor costs $10 more to make, and everyone (AMD, Intel, and NV graphics users) benefits, so what? Gsync is a nonstarter for those like me on triple-monitor setups, I'm not paying 3 x the Gsync tax and having to switch video cards too.
The thing is, every monitor isn't going to have it. The VESA update is not a mandate for inclusion, it is announcing support. Very very big difference.
There will be monitors that don't have adaptive refresh, and there will be those that do - G-Sync or otherwise. The ones that don't will be cheaper, and the ones that do will be more expensive because they have a feature the other ones don't. And that won't change based on which one is or isn't proprietary.
Despoiler
Golden Member
Oh it's absolutely dead. You have still not read or have ignored anything I posted on the original Free-Sync thread. The short version is that there is no new hardware needed if a manufacturer is using a programmable TCON. The only change going on here is an addition to the timing logic and an EDID entry to call out that logic. It's trivial. The TCON manufacturers need to update the firmware to support the latest spec. Manufacturers are just going to start selling their monitors with the latest TCON DP 1.2a firmware. Nvidia doesn't have any transistors dedicated to producing timing signals like AMD has had since the 5xxx series. Hence the need for a custom TCON aka G-Sync.
I remember that comment, and I also remember both AMD and Nvidia, along with at least one display manufacturer, saying it wasn't true. If you think otherwise, I suggest you send them your resume.
This, in particular, demands a specific callout since it's so blatantly false that I don't see how you can repeat it. Not a single player in the field has ever come anywhere close to saying that and been able to back it up.
Maximilian
Lifer
So... are you for or against G-sync? :awe:
I'm for variable refresh, no matter who puts it out. It will drive every future purchase of GPU and monitor for me.
What I'm against is AMD's blatant misrepresentation of what FreeSync actually was doing in the demo, what it would require in terms of hardware, and their utter disinterest of actually doing the engineering legwork to make this happen and instead announcing that they were trying to "encourage" the display OEMs to do the R&D for them.
Now they claim to be "working closely with these vendors" - this is a change. Surprising, and a little disconcerting, that they didn't feel like it was worth mentioning just who those vendors were.
What I'm against is AMD's blatant misrepresentation of what FreeSync actually was doing in the demo, what it would require in terms of hardware, and their utter disinterest of actually doing the engineering legwork to make this happen and instead announcing that they were trying to "encourage" the display OEMs to do the R&D for them.
Now they claim to be "working closely with these vendors" - this is a change. Surprising, and a little disconcerting, that they didn't feel like it was worth mentioning just who those vendors were.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
