Freesync and nvidia gpu

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, geo3 said:

The choice IS removed by the prohibitive cost of replacing either the GPU or monitor if the consumer wanted to switch the other. 

 

You have an Nvidia card and want to buy a new monitor with adaptive sync technology.  Monitor x with G-sync is $400. Monitor y with Freesync is $250 and new Radeon card is also $250. You only have a budget of $400.  You can't spend $500 you don't have.  You have no choice at this point.

 

I understand the math, but what people are missing is that the cost being prohibitive for some people doesn't remove the choice.  It might upset you and people can be annoyed with it. But it does not remove the choice.  If you can't afford to buy both then you either buy what you can afford or go without.  That is how life works, If you don't want a gsync system then don't buy it.  Buy a freesync monitor and when you are ready to upgrade your GPU buy an AMD card.  If you want a gsync system then by a gsync monitor and when you are ready to upgrade your GPU buy an Nvidia card.   

 

As I said earlier I have an AMD GPU, I don't know which sync tech I want yet, but which ever one I chose (because it is my choice), then that is the monitor I will buy and then when it is time to update my GPU I will get the appropriate card.  Yes I can save money and just go straight with a freesync monitor, but If i don't want freesync then i have to wait until i can afford both. 

 

Honestly i think this discussion is getting to the point of people confusing product affordability with entitlement.  Not being able to afford what you want is not equal to anti consumer behavior.

 

 

[geo3]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

but what people are missing is that the cost being prohibitive for some people doesn't remove the choice.

It certainly does.

[mr moose]

34 minutes ago, geo3 said:

It certainly does.

 

You are literally blaming the company because you cant afford an option.  Do you also blame Ferrari for taking away your choice when you can only afford a festiva?  do you cry anti consumerism because you cant afford to go to oversees but you can afford to go the next state across? 

 

Again, you are claiming anti consumerism because you feel entitled to something you cant afford.

[geo3]

5 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

You are literally blaming the company because you cant afford an option.  Do you also blame Ferrari for taking away your choice when you can only afford a festiva?  do you cry anti consumerism because you cant afford to go to oversees but you can afford to go the next state across? 

 

Again, you are claiming anti consumerism because you feel entitled to something you cant afford.

Imagine Microsoft made it so you can only run IE on windows. Want a different browser? Use a different OS.  This is literally what Nvidia is doing with monitors. Microsoft got in trouble on anti-consumer grounds for simply bundling IE with windows. What Nvidia is doing it way worse that that.

[geo3]

4 minutes ago, geo3 said:

Imagine Microsoft made it so you can only run IE on windows. Want a different browser? Use a different OS. 

And BTW, you now have to pay for IE, it costs almost as much as a copy of Windows.

[unknownmiscreant]

On 1/12/2018 at 9:46 AM, mr moose said:

 

Both of your examples are cases of pay more, get more.  Traveling overseas is (mostly) further than interstate travel so it costs more. And a Ferrari is faster than say a Nissan or something. 

 

In the case of monitors both gsync and freesync give identical results, despite the higher cost of gsync. 

 

We can afford adaptive sync, however the price is being artificially raised by NV not supporting freesync. This first with your original definition of anti-consumerism:

 

"anti consumer is when a company removes choice from a consumer causing the cost to go up unnecessarily." 

[johnukguy]

17 hours ago, unknownmiscreant said:

Might just get a 144hz 1080p korean monitor or something. But shipping will likely be horrific.

You can get one of the Korean 1440p, 144 Hz Freesync IPS panels for not much more than the 1080p ones and I usually get mine within five days, with free shipping.  I've used these Crossover/Qnix monitors with both AMD and Nvidia GPU's and not had any problems with screen tearing either.

[unknownmiscreant]

3 minutes ago, johnukguy said:

You can get one of the Korean 1440p, 144 Hz Freesync IPS panels for not much more than the 1080p ones and I usually get mine within five days, with free shipping.  I've used these Crossover/Qnix monitors with both AMD and Nvidia GPU's and not had any problems with screen tearing either.

Can you send me a link. Also, I'm in new zealand not the US.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, geo3 said:

Imagine Microsoft made it so you can only run IE on windows. Want a different browser? Use a different OS.  This is literally what Nvidia is doing with monitors. Microsoft got in trouble on anti-consumer grounds for simply bundling IE with windows. What Nvidia is doing it way worse that that.

 

1 hour ago, geo3 said:

And BTW, you now have to pay for IE, it costs almost as much as a copy of Windows.

That removes user choice so it is anti consumer, the current position with sync tech doesn't remove choice.

 

1 hour ago, unknownmiscreant said:

Both of your examples are cases of pay more, get more.  Traveling overseas is (mostly) further than interstate travel so it costs more. And a Ferrari is faster than say a Nissan or something. 

 

In the case of monitors both gsync and freesync give identical results, despite the higher cost of gsync. 

 

We can afford adaptive sync, however the price is being artificially raised by NV not supporting freesync. This first with your original definition of anti-consumerism:

 

"anti consumer is when a company removes choice from a consumer causing the cost to go up unnecessarily." 

not pay more get more, pay more get different, by your logic they are both holidays or cars so you should be able to go to Italy whilst paying for a trip to Texas. If you want to use gsync you have to pay for gsync, if you want to pay only for freesync then guess what? you only get freesync.  Demanding Nvidia give you freesync because you cant afford gsync is just entitlement. 

 

Also you are intentionally misrepresenting FS and GS as identical,  there are differences and again it is up to the user to decide whether those differences justify the cost for them.  So I say again,  you have not shown where the choice is removed from the consumer, you don't have to buy Gsync if you think it doesn't justify the cost and if you don't like nvidia then don't buy either their cards or a gsync panel.  They don't have a gun to your head making you buy their stuff and they certainly haven't monopolized the market to remove your choice.

[geo3]

12 minutes ago, mr moose said:

That removes user choice so it is anti consumer, the current position with sync tech doesn't remove choice.

Not at all. You can totally chose to use a different operating system.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, geo3 said:

Not at all. You can totally chose to use a different operating system.

Then we agree,  Gsync is definitely not anti consumer, because you have the choice.

 

 

[geo3]

Your just trolling at this point. Conversation done.

[unknownmiscreant]

38 minutes ago, mr moose said:

not pay more get more, pay more get different, by your logic they are both holidays or cars so you should be able to go to Italy whilst paying for a trip to Texas. If you want to use gsync you have to pay for gsync, if you want to pay only for freesync then guess what? you only get freesync.  Demanding Nvidia give you freesync because you cant afford gsync is just entitlement. 

 

Also you are intentionally misrepresenting FS and GS as identical,  there are differences and again it is up to the user to decide whether those differences justify the cost for them.  So I say again,  you have not shown where the choice is removed from the consumer, you don't have to buy Gsync if you think it doesn't justify the cost and if you don't like nvidia then don't buy either their cards or a gsync panel.  They don't have a gun to your head making you buy their stuff and they certainly haven't monopolized the market to remove your choice.

GS has no advantages over freesync. The result is the same, you get an adaptive sync enabled XXHz monitor whether you use freesync or gsync.

 

Your holiday logic is very flawed, going to italy gives you a very different experience from going to texas and the simple fact is ones requires you to travel further (depending where you live ofc) so one will be more expensive. Really there is no talking to you. You change your arguments every time they are refuted. 

 

Conversation over. I will no longer be replying to you.

[mr moose]

13 minutes ago, unknownmiscreant said:

GS has no advantages over freesync. The result is the same, you get an adaptive sync enabled XXHz monitor whether you use freesync or gsync.

 

Your holiday logic is very flawed, going to italy gives you a very different experience from going to texas and the simple fact is ones requires you to travel further (depending where you live ofc) so one will be more expensive. Really there is no talking to you. You change your arguments every time they are refuted. 

 

Conversation over. I will no longer be replying to you.

I haven't changed anything, my argument is exactly the same.  The biggest difference between the two is quality control,  anyone can make a freesync monitor, but if you want to make a gsync it has to pass the nvidia approval process.

https://www.pcworld.com/article/2974781/displays/g-sync-vs-freesync-faq-how-variable-refresh-rate-displays-make-pc-games-super-smooth.html?page=2

 

This is not something i am just making up and it is something that people are willing to pay more for.  So I am going to ask again,  how is the consumers choice removed?  at what point do you not get to choose between the two?  How is nvidia making you buy into Gsync?

 

 

Again, I cant believe you keep  skipping this bit, but you are not being forced to buy nvidia products.  If you bought an nvidia card it was by choice.  going with AMD doesn't restrict you from anything other than gsync, going with nvidia doesn't restrict you from anything other than freesync, it's not that complicated. 

 

 

EDIT: Also you don't get to make a rebuttal and accusations then claim you are not going to reply.  That is the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and screaming "I'm not listening". If you wish to stop replying, then stop replying, you don't need to tell everyone you are not going to reply.

[unknownmiscreant]

36 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Again, I cant believe you keep  skipping this bit, but you are not being forced to buy nvidia products.  If you bought an nvidia card it was by choice.  going with AMD doesn't restrict you from anything other than gsync, going with nvidia doesn't restrict you from anything other than freesync, it's not that complicated. 

I and the two others in this thread have already rebutted this point may times. Find a new one and stop trolling us.

 

Every single point you have raised has little to no evidence to support it and can be easily refuted. Find something that stands up to scrutiny.

 

And as for your comment about not replying, you haven't exactly listened to what we have had to say, every time we have refuted the point of 'they are not limiting options' you have rephrased it and raised it again. At a certain point I get bored of talking to people like you who refuse to listen or look at evidence. Congratulations at being the first person I have chosen to block here.

[johnukguy]

5 hours ago, unknownmiscreant said:

Can you send me a link. Also, I'm in new zealand not the US.

Look for Dream-Seller on Ebay. He has different listings for the EU and the US. The monitor brands are usually Qnix and Crossover and Linus did a video on one of these recently. For a full review, Level1techs are big fans of these monitors and do in depth reviews fairly regularly.

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, unknownmiscreant said:

I and the two others in this thread have already rebutted this point may times. Find a new one and stop trolling us.

No you haven't, you just keep saying you have rebutted,  but you have yet to show the mechanism by which you are forced to buy nvidia over AMD.  If you see this type of discussion as trolling then you must be rather emotionally invested in the outcome.

 

2 hours ago, unknownmiscreant said:

 

Every single point you have raised has little to no evidence to support it and can be easily refuted. Find something that stands up to scrutiny.

I don't need evidence to prove something that is so plainly obvious, you make the claim it is anti consumer therefore you have to prove it, that's how the burden of proof works. 

There is absolutely no condition that forces you to buy a gsync monitor or an nvidia card.  If you can't see how ridiculous it is to ask someone to prove something that simple then there is no hope for this discussion.  I keep asking but you refuse to answer, how is Nvidia forcing you to buy their products?  how has nvidia prevented you from buying AMD?  you know and I know they haven't, not being able to afford to buy both a monitor and GPU at he same time is not the same as not having that choice of tech.  

 

2 hours ago, unknownmiscreant said:

 

And as for your comment about not replying, you haven't exactly listened to what we have had to say, every time we have refuted the point of 'they are not limiting options' you have rephrased it and raised it again. At a certain point I get bored of talking to people like you who refuse to listen or look at evidence. Congratulations at being the first person I have chosen to block here.

 

I am heart broken .   If you can't find a way to support your claims, then blaming the other person then ignoring them is hardly going to change that.  

[unknownmiscreant]

1 hour ago, johnukguy said:

Look for Dream-Seller on Ebay. He has different listings for the EU and the US. The monitor brands are usually Qnix and Crossover and Linus did a video on one of these recently. For a full review, Level1techs are big fans of these monitors and do in depth reviews fairly regularly.

Thanks man. The crossovver 270x looks like pretty much what I am after.

[unknownmiscreant]

54 minutes ago, mr moose said:

There is absolutely no condition that forces you to buy a gsync monitor or an nvidia card.  If you can't see how ridiculous it is to ask someone to prove something that simple then there is no hope for this discussion.  I keep asking but you refuse to answer, how is Nvidia forcing you to buy their products?  how has nvidia prevented you from buying AMD?  you know and I know they haven't, not being able to afford to buy both a monitor and GPU at he same time is not the same as not having that choice of tech.  

Googleing 'anti-consumerism definition' brings us this:

Quote

Anti-consumerism is a sociopolitical ideology that is opposed to consumerism, the continual buying and consuming of material possessions.

(excuse the formatting it was from the webpage and wont go away .)

 

Nvidia do not force you to buy one product over another or from buying amd. However, your definition of anti consumerism has morphed thought out this thread. 

This was your first post in this thread:

Quote

That's not anti consumer, anti consumer is when a company removes choice from a consumer causing the cost to go up unnecessarily.  The consumer has a choice in this case.

Nvidia has (purposefully) removed freesync compatibility on desktop cards. This forces users to buy g-sync if they wish to use adaptive refresh technology with an nvidia gpu. G-sync is more expensive than freesync. Therefore nvidia's behavior fits your original definition of anti-consumerism.

Your next post in the thread was:

Quote

That's still not anti consumer.  There is no removal of choice from consumers.   You are not forced to buy either brand, The fact that G-sync is still around when it costs more and can be avoided by buying AMD stands testimony to what consumers want, not what they are forced to buy.

It looks to me like you have changed your definition of anti-consumerism to be "Anti-consumerism is the restriction of what products are available to consumers." Nvida's behavior re g-sync does not strictly fit into this as the consumer can still choose. However this definition is much more extreme than your original one and differs from what I have found online. It is true this is the worst case of anti-consumerism, however I think the true definition lies more in the online definition I found.

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but at this point we are just discussing the definition of a word. We both basically agree it would be much better if NV allowed the use of freesync.

 

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

The biggest difference between the two is quality control,  anyone can make a freesync monitor, but if you want to make a gsync it has to pass the nvidia approval process.

https://www.pcworld.com/article/2974781/displays/g-sync-vs-freesync-faq-how-variable-refresh-rate-displays-make-pc-games-super-smooth.html?page=2

As for this, NV do not state what testing they put panels through before allowing them to be used with g-sync. I would suspect this is more a measure of limiting the number of g-sync panels available to keep prices high. I will remain skeptical of the true purposes of this testing until such a time as they disclose what criteria must be met for a panel to be g-sync enabled.

 

There may well be some benefits such as better anti-ghosting on g-sync panels, but I think it would favour the consumers more to be able to choose if they are willing to pay for this, and use a freesync display if not.

 

I hope this addresses your point of wishing to have a more open discussion about this.

[mr moose]

13 minutes ago, unknownmiscreant said:

Googleing 'anti-consumerism definition' brings us this:

(excuse the formatting it was from the webpage and wont go away .)

 

Here is the definition I posted earlier:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-consumer

 

I specifically called attention to the word "improperly". As this implies there are specific caveats that determine at which point a condition becomes anti consumer.   I have always maintained from the very beginning that to be anti consumer the consumer has to have their choice removed (not just by the product being a little bit more expensive), I still stand by that because if the consumer can buy another brand for the same result then the company is not being anti consumer they are just making a proprietary product.

 

13 minutes ago, unknownmiscreant said:

Nvidia do not force you to buy one product over another or from buying amd. However, your definition of anti consumerism has morphed thought out this thread. 

This was your first post in this thread:

See above.

 

13 minutes ago, unknownmiscreant said:

Nvidia has (purposefully) removed freesync compatibility on desktop cards. This forces users to buy g-sync if they wish to use adaptive refresh technology with an nvidia gpu. G-sync is more expensive than freesync. Therefore nvidia's behavior fits your original definition of anti-consumerism.

It does not force users to buy Nvidia, you can buy an AMD card and freesync monitor.  You will get the same results (even you have said this).    Not being able to afford both a new monitor and card at the same time is not the same as being forced to buy one specific brand.

 

13 minutes ago, unknownmiscreant said:

 

It looks to me like you have changed your definition of anti-consumerism to be "Anti-consumerism is the restriction of what products are available to consumers." Nvida's behavior re g-sync does not strictly fit into this as the consumer can still choose. However this definition is much more extreme than your original one and differs from what I have found online. It is true this is the worst case of anti-consumerism, however I think the true definition lies more in the online definition I found.

See above

13 minutes ago, unknownmiscreant said:

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but at this point we are just discussing the definition of a word. We both basically agree it would be much better if NV allowed the use of freesync.

No, I will likely not buy an Nvidia card because I hate their drivers.  I couldn't give a rats arse if they supported freesync or not.  I do however believe every company has the right to make their own products and let the market decide if they are worth buying, if we force a company to do things that reduce it's ability to get a ROI then they will inevitable stop researching new tech.   If it truly is shit and not worth the extra $$ then consumers will move away from it and it will either die or become apart of freesync.  For me personally seeing as I am about to buy a monitor and have an AMD card then I have to decide very carefully which path I will go, but that is again the crux of my point, it is my choice which path I go.

 

13 minutes ago, unknownmiscreant said:

 

As for this, NV do not state what testing they put panels through before allowing them to be used with g-sync. I would suspect this is more a measure of limiting the number of g-sync panels available to keep prices high. I will remain skeptical of the true purposes of this testing until such a time as they disclose what criteria must be met for a panel to be g-sync enabled.

I did provide a link to a recent article explaining most of this.  I do not make assumptions regarding someones intentions.

 

13 minutes ago, unknownmiscreant said:

 

There may well be some benefits such as better anti-ghosting on g-sync panels, but I think it would favour the consumers more to be able to choose if they are willing to pay for this, and use a freesync display if not.

See my earlier comment regarding the market deciding if the price premium is justified in the end product.

 

13 minutes ago, unknownmiscreant said:

 

I hope this addresses your point of wishing to have a more open discussion about this.

 

Yes it does, thank you.    

 

 

For the record, I do understand why you'd be pissed that you can't just buy the cheaper freesync monitor to go with your current nv card,  I just don't see it as anti consumer by any of the current definitions.

 

  

[unknownmiscreant]

@mr mooseIts a grey area. The definition youre going by is the most extreme case. I happen to think theres more of a grey area.

 

Also, clicking on the link you provided gives this as a definition (for me at least)

Quote

not favorable to consumers : improperly favoring the interests of businesses over the interests of consumers 

• anti-consumer practices

Well that seems to fit this situation.

15 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Not being able to afford both a new monitor and card at the same time is not the same as being forced to buy one specific brand.

It kinda does for big ticket items like GPUs and high end monitors. I am looking at having to spend $1k (NZ) for a 1080p gysnc panel, whereas a freesync one costs $500, but id need to buy a vega 56 to replace my 1070 (another $1k bloody coin miners  )

18 minutes ago, mr moose said:

No, I will likely not buy an Nvidia card because I hate their drivers.  I couldn't give a rats arse if they supported freesync or not.  I do however believe every company has the right to make their own products and let the market decide if they are worth buying, if we force a company to do things that reduce it's ability to get a ROI then they will inevitable stop researching new tech.   If it truly is shit and not worth the extra $$ then consumers will move away from it and it will either die or become apart of freesync.  For me personally seeing as I am about to buy a monitor and have an AMD card then I have to decide very carefully which path I will go, but that is again the crux of my point, it is my choice which path I go.

TBH with you, part of the reason I feel rather strongly about this is that I am also pissed at NV about other issues like this. Its grey anti-consumer stuff like encrypting the bios to limit overclocking. 

 

The main reason I want it to be universal is so that I can jump between the two depending on which is making the better product at the time I wish to upgrade, rather than having to buy a new monitor to change vendors.

 

i did not mind paying more for g-sync before freesync existed. But now it does, it does not have much in the way of benefits. Also, I suspect NV would have known about it from VESA while or before they were developing g-sync. So its a dick move to not allow freesync atm. It will likely die pretty soon, as every thread like this says it is not worth it.

 

I actively support companies researching new stuff. Although at I certain point it becomes too damn expensive for the gains it offers.

 

Im probably going to get a freesync display and maybe a cheap amd card to run the display and render on my nv card. Or just hack the NV drivers.

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, unknownmiscreant said:

@mr mooseIts a grey area. The definition youre going by is the most extreme case. I happen to think theres more of a grey area.

 

Also, clicking on the link you provided gives this as a definition (for me at least)

Well that seems to fit this situation.

It kinda does for big ticket items like GPUs and high end monitors. I am looking at having to spend $1k (NZ) for a 1080p gysnc panel, whereas a freesync one costs $500, but id need to buy a vega 56 to replace my 1070 (another $1k bloody coin miners  )

 

I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree.  

 

2 hours ago, unknownmiscreant said:

TBH with you, part of the reason I feel rather strongly about this is that I am also pissed at NV about other issues like this. Its grey anti-consumer stuff like encrypting the bios to limit overclocking. 

This is where I say don't buy Nvidia,  that's where we consumers speak the loudest.  Sell your 1070 and get a freesync system or get a freesync monitor now and wait till your next upgrade cycle on the GPU and get AMD.   As much as we complain about companies like nvidia and intel having too much control, the reality is they only have the power consumers give them.  If people are happy to trade of a price premium, shitty drivers and encrypted bios for an extra 10 FPS in some game then that is what Nvidia will do. But if people move to AMD then nvidia will get he message.

 

2 hours ago, unknownmiscreant said:

The main reason I want it to be universal is so that I can jump between the two depending on which is making the better product at the time I wish to upgrade, rather than having to buy a new monitor to change vendors.

That is annoying I'll grant you, but at the end of the day how long have you had your current monitor?  how long have you had the one brand of video card?  I have had my current monitor for more than a decade and up until my latest GPU I had nothing but Nvidia.  Which means sticking with one brand for a decade until your monitor needs updating really isn't going to work out that much different financially.   The biggest jump is the first one deciding which way to go. 

 

 

2 hours ago, unknownmiscreant said:

Im probably going to get a freesync display and maybe a cheap amd card to run the display and render on my nv card. Or just hack the NV drivers.

 

 If you really want to go freesync, then just get the free sync monitor you want and upgrade the GPU later.  If you do succeed with hacking the drivers send me a PM because I would be interested to know how you get on.

[unknownmiscreant]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree.  

Yeah I'm happy to do that. I have unignored (is that a word?) you. Sorry.

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

This is where I say don't buy Nvidia,  that's where we consumers speak the loudest.  Sell your 1070 and get a freesync system or get a freesync monitor now and wait till your next upgrade cycle on the GPU and get AMD.   As much as we complain about companies like nvidia and intel having too much control, the reality is they only have the power consumers give them.  If people are happy to trade of a price premium, shitty drivers and encrypted bios for an extra 10 FPS in some game then that is what Nvidia will do. But if people move to AMD then nvidia will get he message.

I won't. Never again. IDK if I want to sell my 1070, as I also bought a waterblock and things for it and it fits my purposes, ill also take a $200 (NZ) loss, plus the waterblock. But I will likely end up getting a freesync monitor and eventually an AMD GPU, but I don't want to jump on Vega ATM. Although there's another gpu price spike so... maybe. Although I can't buy any vega cards atm, only Polaris. Could just use my old 6600GT for a bit .

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

 If you really want to go freesync, then just get the free sync monitor you want and upgrade the GPU later.  If you do succeed with hacking the drivers send me a PM because I would be interested to know how you get on.

I have a couple of ideas re the drivers, as NV use freesync on laptops. Send me a PM if you wanna know more, I'm not writing about it here.

 

I will likely just get a cheap korean freesync monitor and use it till its time to upgrade my 1070. My current moniotrs are a pair of 1920x1200 IPS displays rated for 5-8(ish)ms. The colours are good, its just I am after high refresh rate 1080p.