Pcperspective Review The First FreeSync Monitor With A 30-144hz Range

[Zah]

I dont know what people are expecting. Either you're trying have your e-penis on full swing, or straight out trolling.

 

This is what a lot of people actually want. Forget 1440P, people who benefit from this are the fps gamers, whose fps can go up and down in some demanding games. Most fps gamers still stick to 1080P because are you really gonna spend $600-700 for a 144hz 1440P panel. Refresh rate > resolution, for fps gamers and I expect everyone to know this already. If you don't, well there we go.

 

Considering most 24" 1080P 144hz TN monitors cost around $200, the $100 price premium makes a lot of sense and basically fulfills what AMD promised to us

There shouldn't BE a 100 dollar premium, that's the whole point of freesync.  My monitor costs less and has better specs, but lacks Freesync.

[HalGameGuru]

There shouldn't BE a 100 dollar premium, that's the whole point of freesync.  My monitor costs less and has better specs, but lacks Freesync.

There is a difference between a manufacturer charging a bit more electively due to uniqueness of product or differentiation, and increasing the base cost of the product by default. This is an extra hundred dollars for a first of its kind product. Not a hundred dollars for the technology as a blanket cost. As the market fleshes out and direct competition to specific products arise prices will drop.

[xtroria]

There shouldn't BE a 100 dollar premium, that's the whole point of freesync.  My monitor costs less and has better specs, but lacks Freesync.

 

If you don't want a price premium at all for freesync, everybody needs to boycott nvidia until they support adaptivesync / freesync too. Then, adaptivesync will be an industry standard and the prices will go down

[kuddlesworth9419]

Agree. The Acer GN246HL which is the cheapest 144 Hz 1080p monitor typically hovers around the $200 mark. $100 more is a steep premium for something that is more like a tertiary issue to most gamers. For your 1080p gamer who will probably be pairing it with a 380 or 960, that money could be spent on a 970 or 390 instead (yes i know Nvidia doesn't use FreeSync but you get the point) or even upgrade to a 27 inch 144 Hz monitor. Both FreeSync and GSync still need to come down in price.

Freesync was meant to be free but obviously that wasn't true.

[silberdrachi]

If you don't want a price premium at all for freesync, everybody needs to boycott nvidia until they support adaptivesync / freesync too. Then, adaptivesync will be an industry standard and the prices will go down

 

Adaptive sync is basically already there, AMD cards forward will support it, Intel said they are planning on supporting it, and Nvidia (whether they want to admit it or not) supports it on eDP displays for things like laptops.

 

They just don't want to support it on desktop because they are able to charge a premium and get a cut of the monitor sales by shoving in their chip.

 

I cant wait until someone hacks the Nvidia driver to make it think all DP displays are eDP displays and then all of a sudden you can use your 980ti on a freesync display for the best of both worlds.

 

Fuck proprietary bullshit.

 

 

Freesync was meant to be free but obviously that wasn't true.

 

Freesync was meant to be a cheaper option, the issue is that the monitor companies have to recoup the cost of adding in the Adaptive Sync support. After this is a standard across all monitors and they are selling in bulk, the premium will slowly go away. This is the case with all new technology.

[dragosudeki]

Freesync was meant to be free but obviously that wasn't true.

Correction: It was meant to be free for the manufacturers (and is). Of course, they are businesses and will raise the price to increase the profit regardless. Monitor prices seem to raise significantly, regardless of how small the upgrades seem to be(more pixels, more frame rate, smaller response time, etc).

[NeatSquidYT]

It's always funny seeing people on tech forums with expensive hardware who don't know that they're the minority.

It's always funny seeing people that thinks that everyone buys expensive monitors just like them like it's the norm

[ivan134]

Freesync was meant to be a cheaper option, the issue is that the monitor companies have to recoup the cost of adding in the Adaptive Sync support. After this is a standard across all monitors and they are selling in bulk, the premium will slowly go away. This is the case with all new technology.

 

 

Correction: It was meant to be free for the manufacturers (and is). Of course, they are businesses and will raise the price to increase the profit regardless. Monitor prices seem to raise significantly, regardless of how small the upgrades seem to be(more pixels, more frame rate, smaller response time, etc).

Thanks. I was going to respond but you both already did.

[ThreePinkApples]

Finally a monitor that goes down to 30. Until now I've felt Freesync and G-sync was partly pointless. 

Now if only they could reach 24, that would be perfect, but I'm happy with 30. 

 

Next part is a 4K IPS monitor with 30-75hz range (more if possible of course, but that is not going to happen before DP1.3 comes on graphicscards)

[Humbug]

Really fantastic dynamic refresh rate window. 30H to 144Hz is just about perfect.

Good to see the freesync ecosystem improving. I would like to in a couple years time buy a 4K IPS display with a freesync range of 30Hz to 90Hz. Hopefully by then more affordable GPUs will be able to drive 4K.

[Noctus]

It's always funny seeing people that thinks that everyone buys expensive monitors just like them like it's the norm

 

Don't think you quite get what ivan is saying.

[Notional]

The best part is that this means we have a monitor controller out there capable of doing 30-144hz @ 1080p. Now we just need some that can do it @ 1440p and maybe 100hz @ 3440x1440p.

 

 

Finally a monitor that goes down to 30. Until now I've felt Freesync and G-sync was partly pointless. 

Now if only they could reach 24, that would be perfect, but I'm happy with 30. 

 

Next part is a 4K IPS monitor with 30-75hz range (more if possible of course, but that is not going to happen before DP1.3 comes on graphicscards)

LCD's can hardly sustain an image at 30hz. That is also why PCPer mentions some noise in the dark areas, when it goes all the way down to 30. You'll have to wait for OLED if you want lower.

[ThreePinkApples]

The best part is that this means we have a monitor controller out there capable of doing 30-144hz @ 1080p. Now we just need some that can do it @ 1440p and maybe 100hz @ 3440x1440p.

 

 

LCD's can hardly sustain an image at 30hz. That is also why PCPer mentions some noise in the dark areas, when it goes all the way down to 30. You'll have to wait for OLED if you want lower.

I know, but I kinda supsect the reason for this is because they have never had any need to go that low. Now that there is some kind of small demand for it, they might look in to it, and it might not be so hard to fix as they've thought. That just me hoping of course.

But yeah, I know, wait for OLED. I'm still debating if I'm going to wait for OLED or not to buy a new monitor. For now, I think I will, as there are no perfect monitor out there yet anyways. 

[Misanthrope]

Not bad but I'm more exited about the Wasabi Mango:

 

Not listed: Freesync support, 120hz on 1080p

 

 

SPECIFICATIONS
Model Name: WASABI MANGO UHD420 Real 4K HDMI 2.0
Panel Type: AH-IPS LED Back Light
Size: 42 Type 16:9 Wide (106.47cm)
Viewing Screen Size: 927.94mm (H) x 521.96mm (V)
Resolution: UHD 4K (3840 x 2160)
Pixel Pitch: 0.24165mm x 0.24165mm
Brightness: 400cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 1,200:1
Dynamic Contrast Ratio: 1,000,000:1
Response Time: 5ms
Viewing Angle: 178/178
Vertical Frequency : 60Hz
Horizontal Frequency: 30~85KHz
Input: 2xHDMI 2.0, 2xHDMI 1.4a , 1xDisplay Port 1.2
Built in Speaker: Stereo (10Wx10W)
Power Consumption: 90W (power saving mode: 0.5W)
Size (Including Speaker): 37.3" (948.2mm) x 23.5" (597.1mm) x 10.8" (274.3mm)
Weight: 27lbs (12.3kg)
Others: Including DP & HDMI cable, Remote controller

[Notional]

I know, but I kinda supsect the reason for this is because they have never had any need to go that low. Now that there is some kind of small demand for it, they might look in to it, and it might not be so hard to fix as they've thought. That just me hoping of course.

But yeah, I know, wait for OLED. I'm still debating if I'm going to wait for OLED or not to buy a new monitor. For now, I think I will, as there are no perfect monitor out there yet anyways. 

 

The problem are the Liquid Crystal's in the LCD. They can only hold a charge for ~30ms, which is 30hz. After that they reset to default (off/closed), which is why that Asus laptop with a leaked mobile gsync driver, had those blackouts. LCD is about as developed as can be. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I doubt it's worth the efforts.

 

We need Samsung and all the other big panel vendors to go OLED now. LG basically has a monopoly.

[ThreePinkApples]

We need Samsung and all the other big panel vendors to go OLED now. LG basically has a monopoly.

Well, I'm happy with only LG for now, as long as they start making OLED monitors too. 

[owen.fitzpatrick]

Now just give us this for 30 - 100hz on a 3440x1440 Freesync ultrawide.

for less than $1500