If AMD gives NVidia users the ability to use BlalckSync, could that make G-Sync crash?

[Gaming_Addiction]

Nobody will overpay for Nvidias overpriced monitors if they already have the technology. What would happen to G-Sync if AMD does do that?

[Amanaman83]

What is "BlalckSync"?

[Gaming_Addiction]

What is "BlalckSync"?

blasdsfnl scync

[Amanaman83]

blasdsfnl scync

Oh, ok

[JoshM]

I don't even know what blasdsfnl is...

[ohJey]

I thought AMD's implementation was 'free sync'

[TheSLSAMG]

I'm sorry, but FreeSync is a load of crap IMO. If this technology can do this so well, why didn't NVIDIA take advantage of it first? Why wouldn't NVIDIA save the time and money instead of creating a new standard? The reason? There is something fatally wrong with FreeSync. What this is, I don't know, but there is something wrong.

[Gaming_Addiction]

Oh, ok

 

I don't even know what blasdsfnl is...

I meant BlankSynv, AMDs alternative to Gsync

[Gaming_Addiction]

I'm sorry, but FreeSync is a load of crap IMO. If this technology can do this so well, why didn't NVIDIA take advantage of it first? Why wouldn't NVIDIA save the time and money instead of creating a new standard? The reason? There is something fatally wrong with FreeSync. What this is, I don't know, but there is something wrong.

NVidia just wants money, they are not focused on innovation.

[TheSLSAMG]

NVidia just wants money, they are not focused on innovation.

If they "just wanted money", they wouldn't have wasted many millions of dollars developing G-Sync. They would have just jumped onto VBLANK before AMD did. Here is a relevant quote from NVIDIA's own Tom Peterson on why FreeSync is questionable as a desktop alternative.

 

 

Laptops have a different display architecture than desktops, with a more direct interface between the GPU and the LCD panel. Desktop monitors use other interfaces, like HDMI and DisplayPort, and typically have a scaler chip situated in the path between the GPU and the panel.

[Gaming_Addiction]

If they "just wanted money", they wouldn't have wasted many millions of dollars developing G-Sync. They would have just jumped onto VBLANK before AMD did. Here is a relevant quote from NVIDIA's own Tom Peterson on why FreeSync is questionable as a desktop alternative.

AMD wouldnt just claim they have a alternative to it if they had nothing, I highly doupt they develoved it on a laptop so they must have had some test with an actual PC.

[TheSLSAMG]

AMD wouldnt just claim they have a alternative to it if they had nothing, I highly doupt they develoved it on a laptop so they must have had some test with an actual PC.

They showed the test at CES on a laptop. Why not a desktop? They claim it's because it can run on even low end hardware, but this lower latency link is what makes me believe otherwise.

[Gaming_Addiction]

They showed the test at CES on a laptop. Why not a desktop? They claim it's because it can run on even low end hardware, but this lower latency link is what makes me believe otherwise.

AMD could have their reasoning, maybe they were serious about proving it can run on low end hardware or maybe they werent totaly prepared to show it off completly. G-Sync was announced three months ago and AMD has proven that they want to try and innovate for the future. Within three months they have gotten this far and that must have been a rush. Give AMD a break, they are trying to save you from overpaying for a $600 TN monitors.

 

To me Nvidia must be really butthurt so they also could be making false calls even though they have no access to AMDs software. We have to wait and see what AMD has to say in self defence.

[needmorewood]

Nobody will overpay for Nvidias overpriced monitors if they already have the technology. What would happen to G-Sync if AMD does do that?

 

actually people will cause people are stupid and think they will get a premium product

[CatCloud]

I don´t think this "freesync" is the same as G-Sync. we know Nvidia always have been very Premium, but there must be a reason why G-Sync is what it is and not just another Cash cow.

[Gaming_Addiction]

actually people will cause people are stupid and think they will get a premium product

100% of peopel will just toggle it in bios/in game/open software. If they release it Nvidia could stop producting the monitors becasue they know they will loose money.

[TheCroaker]

May I just point out that theres only been 2 prices announced, besides the DIY kits which are hard to obtain, which inflates their prices

if Nvidia really cared ONLY about money and not innovation, they wouldnt have made Shield

they way your acting is irrational, yeah Nvidia has a focus on money, but also you cant blame Nvidia for $600 monitors, the fact is Asus and Philips are who chose how much each is worth

also, the asus one is 144 hz  2560x1440
AMD may have something cool, but since its something free, it will probably be good not great, while paying a small premium, which it will become most likely when Gsync becomes more common the price on it will naturally lower

[Gaming_Addiction]

I don´t think this "freesync" is the same as G-Sync. we know Nvidia always have been very Premium, but there must be a reason why G-Sync is what it is and not just another Cash cow.

freesync syncs the refresh rate with the FPS, same as G-Sync. Nvidia is too self confident, now they only have TXAA and shaddowplay that is exclusice to them for gaming.

[Lord Pantaloons]

I'm sorry, but FreeSync is a load of crap IMO. If this technology can do this so well, why didn't NVIDIA take advantage of it first? Why wouldn't NVIDIA save the time and money instead of creating a new standard? The reason? There is something fatally wrong with FreeSync. What this is, I don't know, but there is something wrong.

^^

[Sammael]

Bottom line, it's better for everyone if there is some universal standard capability for gpus to dynamically change the refresh rates of displays.  If they can build that into displayport 1.3 and updated monitors, then that sounds great to me.

[Gaming_Addiction]

May I just point out that theres only been 2 prices announced, besides the DIY kits which are hard to obtain, which inflates their prices

if Nvidia really cared ONLY about money and not innovation, they wouldnt have made Shield

they way your acting is irrational, yeah Nvidia has a focus on money, but also you cant blame Nvidia for $600 monitors, the fact is Asus and Philips are who chose how much each is worth

also, the asus one is 144 hz  2560x1440

AMD may have something cool, but since its something free, it will probably be good not great, while paying a small premium, which it will become most likely when Gsync becomes more common the price on it will naturally lower

Asus' WQHD monitor is priced at like $800 and the VG monitor is somewhere in 500-600. If Nvidia wanted to push innovation then they would not have made PhysX cards exclusive to them and would not have charged that much for a G-Sync PCB. They are doing the opposite from what AMD and is overcharging consumers.

Just becasue it is free doesent mean it is instantly bad at all, is youtube a bad service for being free?

It is no where near to be a "small premium", it is overhyped TN monitors that can be simply unrequired at all. 

 

Sorry but you sound like one of those Nvidia fanboys that blatantly ignore anything good AMD has to offer because you prefer to overpay and like the color green

[CatCloud]

Dont remember but was there anything bad with G-Sync? ASIDE FROM THE PRICE, like did it only work with a NVIDIA Gpu? 

[Gaming_Addiction]

Bottom line, it's better for everyone if there is some universal standard capability for gpus to dynamically change the refresh rates of displays.  If they can build that into displayport 1.3 and updated monitors, then that sounds great to me.

If it becomes universal couldn't we see higher refresh rates on ips monitors?

[Gaming_Addiction]

Dont remember but was there anything bad with G-Sync? ASIDE FROM THE PRICE, like did it only work with a NVIDIA Gpu? 

Yes it is only limited to Nvidia GPUs and G-Sync TN monitors.

[TheCroaker]

Asus' WQHD monitor is priced at like $800 and the VG monitor is somewhere in 500-600. If Nvidia wanted to push innovation then they would not have made PhysX cards exclusive to them and would not have charged that much for a G-Sync PCB. They are doing the opposite from what AMD and is overcharging consumers.

Just becasue it is free doesent mean it is instantly bad at all, is youtube a bad service for being free?

It is no where near to be a "small premium", it is overhyped TN monitors that can be simply unrequired at all. 

 

Sorry but you sound like one of those Nvidia fanboys that blatantly ignore anything good AMD has to offer because you prefer to overpay and like the color green

you really didnt listen to me, Nvidia didnt price the monitors, Asus and Philips did, that was my point, we dont know how much the PCB was sold for, we just know how much it is being sold to us for

 

and No I am not an Nvidia fan boy, I am considering getting an AMD Card because of Mantle, when we hear more about them

also yes youtube is a bad service for being free, because of how it is set up there has been many issues

they do not protect their content creators for one, leaving them out to dry, where a more premium service, may not be as good in some ways, would be able to take care of their people and also perhaps even pay them more, allowing for better production values... like television almost

and just to add to it, Nvidia has always been proprietary, as bad as that may be, it is what it is, and it makes business sense