Nvidia Pitches Advantages of G-Sync Over AMD's FreeSync

[spartaman64]

 He never said they wouldn't support it if it came out. Hes saying that as of right now they are unable to support that because that this period in time there is nor 240hz tn or ips panel that is compatible.

so vesa should be smeared for saying they support 8k displays with displayport 1.3

[mr moose]

Let's not stretch the truth here. Nobody thinks its anyone's fault for there not being 240Hz monitors being available. My problem is that they are advertising and promoting Freesync as being able to do up to 240Hz when their actual FreeSync monitors available only have a highest of 144Hz. Which is no better than G-Syncs current max of 144Hz (not a max from G-Sync but a max from the monitors). So, let's not lie or make up bullcrap to make a point. AMD is using the VESA standard of 9-240Hz to promote their products, when their actual products have a maxmimum of 40-144Hz. This is the limitation of current panels. So this is a problem with AMD. They are falsely promoting their products to counter NVIDIA but are basically lying in the process. Which shouldn't be acceptable by anyone with half a brain. 

 

If you think it's acceptable to falsely promote products, then I don't know what to tell you, but based on the GTX 970 fiasco, I would assume that people would have a problem with AMD lying about FreeSync, but I guess it's ok since it's AMD, right?  :rolleyes:

 

True, and just like in the nvidia 970 thing, I don't personally think AMD is lying, they are just marketing the truth in a slightly bent manner.   But this is no excuse to run around accusing people of hating on a company just because their opinion is different.

[Sunako]

there have been 8k displays that have been made and shown off.

[mr moose]

so vesa should be smeared for saying they support 8k displays with displayport 1.3

 

The difference there is that VESA are not promoting a product, they are reporting the supporting limits of the current standard. 

[TheProfosist]

So hardware is superior to software. Who would have thought.

That is always the way Nvidia has thought too which is usually why their stuff come on top, though locked down. Remember the semi recent crossfires issues where they had to rewrite their entire driver?

[TheProfosist]

there have been 8k displays that have been made and shown off.

like 2 of them.... and for a huge trade show.

[spartaman64]

The difference there is that VESA are not promoting a product, they are reporting the supporting limits of the current standard. 

so vesa are not promoting their displayport they dont want people to use their displayport

[spartaman64]

there have been 8k displays that have been made and shown off.

so then msi says some of their motherboards support usb 3.1 but there are no usb 3.1 devices yet so we should rage at msi

[BiG StroOnZ]

 

 

so people should be outraged at vesa saying they can support 8k monitors with displayport 1.3 because they are not 8k monitors yet 

 

 

so vesa should be smeared for saying they support 8k displays with displayport 1.3

 

 

VESA doesn't have competition because they are an organization. However AMD is using FreeSync to counter NVIDIA's G-Sync. So in that process, you should not be stretching the truth or making unsubstantiated claims. AMD should use a real spec, like 40-144Hz (the current maximum allowed by their panels). But not 9-240Hz because there's nothing available right now, and nothing that's going to be available for quite some time. For people who aren't tech savvy, or research. They will see FreeSync as being promoted to do 9-240Hz, compared to G-Sync's 30-144Hz and automatically assume it is better because of that.

 

 

 

True, and just like in the nvidia 970 thing, I don't personally think AMD is lying, they are just marketing the truth in a slightly bent manner.   But this is no excuse to run around accusing people of hating on a company just because their opinion is different.

 

Marketing the truth in a bent matter, lying, stretching the truth, whatever you want to call it. It's not acceptable for a company to do. At least in my opinion, when comparing a product to the competitors. But yes, I have absolutely no hate for AMD, I am not hating AMD, just simply stating the facts. That is all.

[spartaman64]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VESA doesn't have competition because they are an organization. However AMD is using FreeSync to counter NVIDIA's G-Sync. So in that process, you should not be stretching the truth or making unsubstantiated claims. AMD should use a real spec, like 40-144Hz (the current maximum allowed by their panels). But not 9-240Hz because there's nothing available right now, and nothing that's going to be available for quite some time. For people who aren't tech savvy, or research. They will see FreeSync as being promoted to do 9-240Hz, compared to G-Sync's 30-144Hz and automatically assume it is better because of that.

 

 

 

 

Marketing the truth in a bent matter, lying, stretching the truth, whatever you want to call it. It's not acceptable for a company to do. At least in my opinion, when comparing a product to the competitors. But yes, I have absolutely no hate for AMD, I am not hating AMD, just simply stating the facts. That is all.

 

so msi is lying when they say they support usb 3.1 on some of their motherboards because there are no usb 3.1 devices yet

[mr moose]

so vesa are not promoting their displayport they dont want people to use their displayport

 

No they are not promoting it, they don't need to promote it.  Being the body that over sees the standard they don't get royalties from it's use. 

[TheProfosist]

so msi is lying when they say they support usb 3.1 on some of their motherboards because there are no usb 3.1 devices yet

There are USB 3.1 devices, just very very few of them.

[Sunako]

Sony and Christie have both had  projectors for theatre operations that are capable of 8k since 2009 there was never really any news about it or push to bring these to more theatres then just they few that had them

1: because there were no cameras to record content that that resolution for cinema yet. 2: Most threatres around the country were still using Christie 35 mm film. it did not  change until 2012 that digital became more common then film.  Now with the plans of Imax brining  their own 8k Format out  there is a push for them and content for them. And with that come consumer 8k displays for homes.

[spartaman64]

There are USB 3.1 devices, just very very few of them.

i dont think there is. when msi is demoing usb 3.1 they had to rig up 2 ssds in raid 0

[spartaman64]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824136126apparently there are 240hz monitors so according to you people's logic because there are 240hz monitors amd isnt lying

[Sunako]

spartaman64  Are you next going to complain that when z97 came out with optional  sata express that because no drives were ready on launch it was false advertising. Because they put it there ready to be used

no one has passed judgment on it yet because we have been unable to test it.  Freesync was the same untill it was able to be tested. I have seen very few people flat out bad mouthing ADM for their attempts to make freesync as good as they can. Their are flaws . Gsync  had them at first as well. AMD will have fewer and fewer as time goes by. But as it stands now 30-40 hz is the lowest potential freesync has at this point in time.

[Sunako]

spartan the  240hz monitor you listed isnt a true 240 hz monitor it takes a 120 hz signal and doubles each frame.

[BiG StroOnZ]

so msi is lying when they say they support usb 3.1 on some of their motherboards because there are no usb 3.1 devices yet

It's a very different scenario here. Firstly, anyone can support USB 3.1 on their motherboards. So MSI can't compare it to ASUS or ASROCK, or GIGABYTE and say our motherboards are better because we have USB 3.1. Those other manufacturers can easily support USB 3.1 and as a matter a fact ASRock does support USB 3.1. So they wouldn't be able to do that because any company can support USB 3.1. But right now no company can support 9-240Hz because it doesn't exist.

 

AMD says they not only support 9-240Hz but are making it seem like they are superior compared to G-Sync because G-Sync only supports 30-144Hz. However there are no monitors that support 9-240Hz. The only reason why G-Sync uses a realistic spec of 30-144Hz in their advertising is because that's the current minimum and maximum allowed by panels. I'm sure as soon as those limits are broken NVIDIA will revise their spec. But as of now nothing exists, or is planned. Which is why they went with a realistic spec. Whereas AMD is not using their realistic spec (the actual spec discovered in the actual panels they have available) which is 40-144Hz. 

[spartaman64]

It's a very different scenario here. Firstly, anyone can support USB 3.1 on their motherboards. So MSI can't compare it to ASUS or ASROCK, or GIGABYTE and say our motherboards are better because we have USB 3.1. Those other manufacturers can easily support USB 3.1 and as a matter a fact ASRock does support USB 3.1. So they wouldn't be able to do that because any company can support USB 3.1. But right now no company can support 9-240Hz because it doesn't exist.

 

AMD says they not only support 9-240Hz but are making it seem like they are superior compared to G-Sync because G-Sync only supports 30-144Hz. However there are no monitors that support 9-240Hz. The only reason why G-Sync uses a realistic spec of 30-144Hz in their advertising is because that's the current minimum and maximum allowed by panels. I'm sure as soon as those limits are broken NVIDIA will revise their spec. But as of now nothing exists, or is planned. Which is why they went with a realistic spec. Whereas AMD is not using their realistic spec (the actual spec discovered in the actual panels they have available) which is 40-144Hz. 

there is a 240hz monitor but i agree that if nvidia can support 240hz also with g sync amd needs to do more research

[PopReference]

there is a 240hz monitor but i agree that if nvidia can support 240hz also with g sync amd needs to do more research

That "G-sync supports up to 240hz" is a rumor that's only recently been started, AMD had no reason to believe that G-sync could support anything beyond the published range. @BiG StroOnZ confirmed that earlier.

[BiG StroOnZ]

 

there is a 240hz monitor but i agree that if nvidia can support 240hz also with g sync amd needs to do more research

 

It's not a 240Hz monitor it's a 120Hz monitor with strobing as someone mentioned earlier. There are no 240Hz panels yet. I don't think it's more or less about AMD doing more research I think it's more about them wanting to look better than the competition. 

 

That "G-sync supports up to 240hz" is a rumor that's only recently been started, AMD had no reason to believe that G-sync could support anything beyond the published range. @BiG StroOnZ confirmed that earlier.

 

Using the word rumor, makes it seem like it's speculative. It's been confirmed by Tom Petersen and people inside of PCPer. So I wouldn't call it a rumor, it's way more than a rumor. NVIDIA has stated that 144Hz isn't a G-Sync Limitation but a Panel Limitation. Tom stated that they can go outside of the monitors zone. Tom also said that both FreeSync and G-Sync have the same base specs meaning both have the ability to communicate at any range. Malventano explained giving actual numbers, which Tom didn't do, but it still correlates exactly with what Tom said. 

[TheProfosist]

i dont think there is. when msi is demoing usb 3.1 they had to rig up 2 ssds in raid 0

That was to demo its speed capabilities and ASUS sell and enclosure like that. Actually 2, one mSATA and one M.2.

[PopReference]

 

 

 

It's not a 240Hz monitor it's a 120Hz monitor with strobing as someone mentioned earlier. There are no 240Hz panels yet. I don't think it's more or less about AMD doing more research I think it's more about them wanting to look better than the competition. 

 

 

Using the word rumor, makes it seem like it's speculative. It's been confirmed by Tom Petersen and people inside of PCPer. So I wouldn't call it a rumor, it's way more than a rumor. NVIDIA has stated that 144Hz isn't a G-Sync Limitation but a Panel Limitation. Tom stated that they can go outside of the monitors zone. Tom also said that both FreeSync and G-Sync have the same base specs meaning both have the ability to communicate at any range. Malventano explained giving actual numbers, which Tom didn't do, but it still correlates exactly with what Tom said. 

 

Tom said "...they’re not that far off..." that is not a confirmation. I don't see PCPer mentioning 240 in relation to G-sync, they more focused on below 30 from what I read. Maybe you can help me were I missed something.

[BiG StroOnZ]

Tom said "...they’re not that far off..." that is not a confirmation. I don't see PCPer mentioning 240 in relation to G-sync, they more focused on below 30 from what I read. Maybe you can help me were I missed something.

 

Tom said that are not that they are not that far off, in respects to the following, " But our technology allows a seamless transition  above and below that minimum framerate that’s required by the panel"  

 

Which above and below what's required by the panel would mean over 144Hz as well as under 30Hz. Malventano used 1-240Hz multiple times when discussing G-Sync's theoretical range.

 

Meanwhile, NVIDIA says the following:

 

 

 

The upper bound is limited by the panel/TCON at this point, with the only G-Sync monitor available today going as high as 6.94ms (144Hz). NVIDIA made it a point to mention that the 144Hz limitation isn’t a G-Sync limit, but a panel limit.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7582/nvidia-gsync-review

 

Which all adds up together that, there is nothing limiting them from a range of 1-240Hz other than the panels themselves, but their technology is more than capable of doing so.

[Notional]

Tom said that are not that they are not that far off, in respects to the following, " But our technology allows a seamless transition  above and below that minimum framerate that’s required by the panel"  

 

Which above and below what's required by the panel would mean over 144Hz as well as under 30Hz. Malventano used 1-240Hz multiple times when discussing G-Syncs theoretical range.

 

Meanwhile, NVIDIA says the following:

 

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7582/nvidia-gsync-review

 

Which all adds up together that, there is nothing limiting them from a range of 1-240Hz other than the panels themselves, but their technology is more than capable of doing so.

 

Speculation at best. That is not at all official, nor useful. AMD only said they support the full spec and hz interval of Adaptive Sync. Nothing dishonest about that, just like 8k in VESA, 240 hz in VESA or USB 3.1. spartaman64 is completely right in that regard.

 

But it really is not that interesting. What is interesting, is whether it works properly or not. It does, it's an open standard, and Nvidia chooses not to support it.