NVIDIA claims that Freesync monitors don't work well even with AMD GPUs

[Blademaster91]

1 minute ago, pas008 said:

why cant they work?

didnt they say non compatible ones still can be activated in control panel?

just ymmv?

Thats what i'm wondering, hopefully someone can test the popular ones that Nvidia says aren't compatible. I guess the worst that could happen is you get the weird ghosting or flickering?

[pas008]

2 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

That's just BS theory cooked up by NVIDIA fanboys. Adaptive Sync is clearly specified under VESA standard. Hint: STANDARD. Standard is defined, but if others don't obey it, how is that AMD's fault? Why are people even blaming AMD if  don't know, Samsung cocks up FreeSync functionality in their monitor? Sure, NVIDIA is anal about it, but also costs more because of it. AMD isn't, they kinda expect that people are logical beings and if monitor manufacturer cocks up, that's not AMD's problem. It could be, but then it would cost money. Instead, market deals with that. If some monitors are known to be crappy, then ppl don't buy it and manufacturer will be forced to do better instead of releasing junk if they want to make money off of it.

just because its open doesnt mean you just let anyone willy dilly slap your label on it

and read below about having some standards

 

Nvidia hasn’t publicly detailed the requirements, but representatives tell me that the company works directly with panel makers like AU Optronics to optimize refresh rates, flicker properties, response times, and visual quality; then works with the display makers (like Asus and Acer) to fine-tune the on-screen display and more. Every monitor is calibrated to the sRGB color gamut.

 

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

[pas008]

4 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

Thats what i'm wondering, hopefully someone can test the popular ones that Nvidia says aren't compatible. I guess the worst that could happen is you get the weird ghosting or flickering?

Support for G-SYNC Compatible monitors will begin Jan. 15 with the launch of our first 2019 Game Ready driver. Already, 12 monitors have been validated as G-SYNC Compatible (from the 400 we have tested so far). We’ll continue to test monitors and update our support list. For gamers who have monitors that we have not yet tested, or that have failed validation, we’ll give you an option to manually enable VRR, too.

https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2019/01/06/g-sync-displays-ces/

[Drak3]

Even if they don't work well, I'll take a RX470 +freesync monitor over a 1080+g sync monitor because my 470 is far better at maintaining consistent framerates than either my 1070 or 1080.

[Mira Yurizaki]

40 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

The whole point of using an open standard is to make validation unnecessary.

 

AMD does have the more stringent Freesync 2 for that.

POSIX is an open standard, but you can't say your OS is a UNIX OS until you get validation.

[RejZoR]

18 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Even if they don't work well, I'll take a RX470 +freesync monitor over a 1080+g sync monitor because my 470 is far better at maintaining consistent framerates than either my 1070 or 1080.

You mean you don't have CPU fast ennough to reliably feed that GTX 1080. Otherwise I can't possibly see how RX470 could compete with any of the GTX 1080 cards...

 

5820K @ 4.5GHz on all cores + GTX 1080Ti + Adaptive V-Sync (in software). Butter smooth mouse movement and zero tearing. If I'm honest I don't know why I'd need FreeSync or G-Sync now that I think of it.

[yian88]

I have a similar issue with my Acer 240hz Freesync monitor when i enable freesync it starts flickering weirdly but only when i have two displays connected.

I use a 4K TV 60hz over hdmi 2.0 and a 1080p Acer 240hz gaming monitor on DP1.2  and hell they dont work well togheter on my RX 580 when i plugged in an old GPU gt 430 and connected my 4K tv to it the freesync issues dissapeared.

So yeah freesync either is being poorly implemented in the driver/monitors or the entire standard is fucked, i personally think its the driver/monitor implementation that doesnt work properly just my opinion.

 

EDIT: I have to add this, even if freesync works poorly or i keep it disabled ever since i switched to RX 580 and i have NEVER seen screen tearing with Freesync OFF and VSYNC OFF in games. I still do not know why maybe having a 120-240hz monitor most games dont even reach 120hz hence it doesnt tear or because i keep Enahnced Sync ON in the AMD Global settings in the driver panel. But even turning that off i have never experienced tearing i tried to enable conditions for tearing and i honestly cannot, i know in windowed Fullscreen window's DWM vsync applies so i cant see tearing except in fullscreen exclusive vsync off/enhanced sync off but i have not seen any tearing even so.

So FreeSync good or not im going to stick to AMD + high refresh monitors in the future, its the best upgrade i ever made and i cant be bothered to care about anything tearing since october i feel really satisfied, if they can fix FreeSync driver issues even better.

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

You mean you don't have CPU fast ennough to reliably feed that GTX 1080. Otherwise I can't possibly see how RX470 could compete with any of the GTX 1080 cards...

5930K @4.5GHz. CPU is never pegged when it happens.

 

Every GTX card I have dips bad and more than AMD cards.

[RejZoR]

18 minutes ago, yian88 said:

I have a similar issue with my Acer 240hz Freesync monitor when i enable freesync it starts flickering weirdly but only when i have two displays connected.

I use a 4K TV 60hz over hdmi 2.0 and a 1080p Acer 240hz gaming monitor on DP1.2  and hell they dont work well togheter on my RX 580 when i plugged in an old GPU gt 430 and connected my 4K tv to it the freesync issues dissapeared.

So yeah freesync either is being poorly implemented in the driver/monitors or the entire standard is fucked, i personally think its the driver/monitor implementation that doesnt work properly just my opinion.

 

EDIT: I have to add this, even if freesync works poorly or i keep it disabled ever since i switched to RX 580 and i have NEVER seen screen tearing with Freesync OFF and VSYNC OFF in games. I still do not know why maybe having a 120-240hz monitor most games dont even reach 120hz hence it doesnt tear or because i keep Enahnced Sync ON in the AMD Global settings in the driver panel. But even turning that off i have never experienced tearing i tried to enable conditions for tearing and i honestly cannot, i know in windowed Fullscreen window's DWM vsync applies so i cant see tearing except in fullscreen exclusive vsync off/enhanced sync off but i have not seen any tearing even so.

So FreeSync good or not im going to stick to AMD + high refresh monitors in the future, its the best upgrade i ever made and i cant be bothered to care about anything tearing since october i feel really satisfied, if they can fix FreeSync driver issues even better.

That is part of the reason. Worst tearing only happens when you exceed the refresh rate. So, if you have 240Hz monitor, chances are, you won't even need any of these features. Now, tearing can happen under certain specific conditions despite that (for example in-game light flickering at certain rate that goes badly with the refresh rate regardless of actual game framerate). That can be mitigated by FreeSync or Adaptive/Fast V-Sync.

[LAwLz]

I don't get why people are so confused about FreeSync and Nvidia card compatibility. It's quite simple.

 

FreeSync is AMD's marketing term for VESA adaptive-Sync standard. They also helped market it and suggested it as a standard based on the already existing variable refresh rate technology in eDP (used in laptops).

 

Any monitor maker is free to implement adaptive-sync without AMD having a word or even touching the product. AMD really has nothing to do with the development or testing for monitors when it comes to adaptive-sync.

AMD does however have control over the FreeSync branding. Monitor makers can apply to have their products branded as FreeSync, although I am not sure if AMD does some testing or has some requirements to get "FreeSync certified".

FreeSync products are adaptive-sync products, but adaptive-sync products are not necessarily FreeSync products.

 

Nvidia now supports adaptive-sync. Note that I say adaptive-sync, not FreeSync (although all FreeSync products are adaptive-sync products).

From what I know, all Nvidia have said is that they have tested a bunch of adaptive-sync products and has created a whitelist for those they deem "worthy". What they test is anyone's guess, but just because a monitor isn't on the white list doesn't mean it flickers or anything like that. It might be something such as the adaptive refresh range isn't wide enough for Nvidia's liking. Or maybe the monitor has issues with overdrive while in variable refresh rate mode (it's rare for adaptive-sync monitors to do this properly).

 

To elaborate, Nvidia only white listing 12 out of 400 monitors doesn't mean 388 Freesync monitors has issues like severe flickering. That severe flickering might happen on 10% (made up number) of the adaptive-sync monitors (note, adaptive-sync and not FreeSync). Nvidia saying that the same happens on AMD graphics cards is not really that hard to believe, considering AMD might not had anything to do with that particular monitor. AMD might not even know it exists, and may not have certified it.

The remaining 87% of monitors that were not added to the whitelist may not qualify for other reasons, such as a too narrow variable refresh rate window, overdrive being too slow or aggressive or other stuff. If variable overdrive is a requirement for being whitelisted then I am not surprised that 97% of monitors tested weren't added to it. AMD has not made it a requirement to getting FreeSync certified, and barely any adaptive-sync monitors support it (it is however a requirement for G-Sync certification).

 

 

TL;DR:

Nvidia saying that some adaptive-sync monitors doesn't work well isn't an attack on AMD since AMD has nothing to do with it.

[yian88]

5 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

That is part of the reason. Worst tearing only happens when you exceed the refresh rate. So, if you have 240Hz monitor, chances are, you won't even need any of these features. Now, tearing can happen under certain specific conditions despite that (for example in-game light flickering at certain rate that goes badly with the refresh rate regardless of actual game framerate). That can be mitigated by FreeSync or Adaptive/Fast V-Sync.

I just tested a game fullscreen on 60hz resolution and its really really difficult to notice the tearing, i was running 130-200 fps with low options so maybe the worst tearing that can happen is when you run 60hz and you get something like 65-70-80 fps, i mean at 130-200 fps it renders so fast you cant even notice the tearing is very subtle, and i NEVER run anything on 60hz even if the game cant reach 120fps+  running 120/240hz resolution with enhanced sync/vsync on = 0 tearing=0 lag = 0 fucks given, if they fix FreeSync ever even better but i wont notice a difference, i tried really hard to notice the difference between EnhancedSync/Vsync and FreeSync  latency wise and its imposible you just cant, and i do use a 1000hz polling usb mouse if i can easily notice 120 to 240hz change i should have been able to notice esync/vsync lag but i cannot because its probably too small so i dont need to worry for the coming years.

Im still waiting for that FreeSync driver fix, the way it communicates flickers my screens and i have other issues with multimonitor outside freesync they need to double down on driver QA and bugfixing, just like the heavy mobile radeon APU issues.

As for nvidia they can F off with their tearing/unstable frames GPU's i had so much vsync lag and tearing issues on nvidia its not funny, although they had good stable multimonitor drivers on windows and bad on linux, amd drivers now work good for me on linux but not on windows waiting for more fixes, and i really love radeon control panel, overlay, frtc, relive etc, in contrast nvidia's control panel looks older than windows XP and featureless.

[RejZoR]

I've had image tearing and corruption months ago (so bad I was starting to look at Vega 64, yeah, actual downgrade from 1080Ti), but not in games. Instead, I had horrible image quality problems in Youtube when Adaptive V-Sync or Fast V-Sync were enabled globally (which is what I have all the time). But with enough bitching, they eventually fixed it and since then, it's working fine. I'm very sensitive to smoothness of mouse and any microstuttering which is usually felt on the view movement so I'd probably notice if something was weird. Haven't had Radeon for few years now so I can't tell, but I remember that AMD had better frame times on Vega and RX cards than NVIDIA.

[Ravens]

Well this is technically true.. I bet $1000 dollars there do exist cheap knock off chinese monitors out there that claim they support Freesync and are actually officially are branded with the Freesync logo, but have issues with it..

 

Hell, even my own monitor made by Samsung (CHG70) which has the newer Freesync 2, wasn't a good Freesync monitor fresh out the box and had a narrow Refresh range, and required multiple firmware updates to correct this at the cost of some brightness in one of the updates.

 

So from my own experience with my own monitor, I can understand and believe Nvidia's claim, as G-Sync monitors are 100% fully tested and ready right out the box for all capabilities of G-Sync, everything from 1Hz up to the monitor's rating. Unlike Freesync, where it's all dependent on the Manufacturer and they decide what range their monitor supports (it's the wildwest). Even my own monitor doesn't push the support as much as Nvidia does, the lowest end of Freesync mine does is only ~40-144, when it shipped, it was something abysmal like 100-144, so that means unless you were pushing high framerates in all games, your freesync would fail..

 

So yeah, there's no strict standards on the Freesync side, as there is with G-Sync, so as a result you definitely will get off brand monitors that claim they support Freesync and are officially licensed, however fail to mention that their freesync support is only in a narrow framerate range.

[tim0901]

On 1/10/2019 at 3:21 PM, pas008 said:

why cant they work?

didnt they say non compatible ones still can be activated in control panel?

just ymmv?

 

It's not that they don't work or that they aren't compatible, but simply that Nvidia doesn't think they're 'worthy' of being given the label. This would include monitors with really narrow (aka practically useless) variable refresh rate ranges for example. 

 

Personally I think this is something AMD should have done from the start. Rather than let manufacturers slap AMD's logo on any old garbage monitor, AMD should have outlined some requirements beyond supporting the Vesa adaptive sync standard for such products. This wouldn't stop manufacturers from making a cheap monitor supporting Vesa adaptive sync that doesn't meet AMD's requirements, but would incentivise them to do so to be allowed to stick AMD's brand name on the box. 

[sof006]

Anything Nvidia says against another company I'll take with a huge amount of salt purely because well... It's bias rubbish. I haven't seen one reviewer of a freesync monitor complain about it not working.

[S w a t s o n]

Not sure if it's been mentioned but Lisa Su responded basically saying Jensen is spewing BS as usual and that Freesync certified monitors do not exhibit these symptoms as they wouldn't pass.

Honestly I found out the hard way that adaptive sync in general is finnicky game to game depending on if you use vsync on vs vsync off or enhanced sync or even just the game engine being weird with it's frame time consistency. My guess is a lot of those "issues" Jensen attributed to the panels is the result of the multitude of game engines and settings choices clashing with adaptive sync.

[leadeater]

On 1/11/2019 at 4:28 AM, pas008 said:

just because its open doesnt mean you just let anyone willy dilly slap your label on it

and read below about having some standards

They don't just allow it, people can lie or mess it up but it's still a standard with defined requirements set by VESA. You can't just call a monitor HDMI 2.0, put a HDMI 2.0 sticker on it, if it only has HDMI 1.2 ports.

 

Nothing stops a similar lie for G-sync, what stops me selling a monitor with a G-sync sticker on it if it doesn't actually have a G-sync module in it? Nothing until people find out.

[AkatsukiKun]

I claim that Nvidia proprietary technology whether it be hardware or software is doesn't work well with my wallet or in fact the majority of people who wanted a variable refresh rate monitor. so oof

[BuckGup]

G-sync didn't work in CSGO and other games so there

[Adramalech]

On 1/10/2019 at 9:34 AM, redteam4ever said:

Radeon cards, it saw the same issues.

That is 100% bull doo doo

[Cyberspirit]

Would be nice if there was a list of all the monitors with their symptoms but, I realize that would take a lot of time.

[Blademaster91]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

They don't just allow it, people can lie or mess it up but it's still a standard with defined requirements set by VESA. You can't just call a monitor HDMI 2.0, put a HDMI 2.0 sticker on it, if it only has HDMI 1.2 ports.

 

Nothing stops a similar lie for G-sync, what stops me selling a monitor with a G-sync sticker on it if it doesn't actually have a G-sync module in it? Nothing until people find out.

The manufacturer can lie,and it may not have a decent adaptive range or other weird symptoms, AMD should be testing some of the more expensive monitors to make sure those meet the certification. But at least when you're buying a "gysnc certified"  monitor even if it lacks the Gsync module you know it isn't just something with the label slapped on it for marketing to gamers.

[JoostinOnline]

On 1/10/2019 at 8:43 AM, RejZoR said:

Lol, NVIDIA is just salty. If there are flickering black frames, this just means NVIDIA's implementation of FreeSync doesn't work, it's not that AMD made FreeSync badly. Big difference.

Not really. The lack of certification is a legitimate problem, and it's why FreeSync 2 was a big deal.

 

[mr moose]

On 1/12/2019 at 9:06 AM, tim0901 said:

Personally I think this is something AMD should have done from the start. Rather than let manufacturers slap AMD's logo on any old garbage monitor, AMD should have outlined some requirements beyond supporting the Vesa adaptive sync standard for such products. This wouldn't stop manufacturers from making a cheap monitor supporting Vesa adaptive sync that doesn't meet AMD's requirements, but would incentivise them to do so to be allowed to stick AMD's brand name on the box. 

They should have, but given they released it at a time when they had less resources to spare and publicity trumped output,  they probably didn't care too much about hardware validation. 

 

I think in hindsight with freesync being basically Async and as such is at the mercy of every company managing to get their little bit right (i.e software to work with the GPU and monitor to be good enough to handle the requirements).  It seems people tend to forget that one of the biggest issues with open standards is that people are free to cut corners.  If AMD wanted to make freesync as solid as gsync then they would have had to do the same thing,  Implement it solely between their GPU Which they control 100% and a feature on a monitor that they also can control 100%.  that way game engines and game software make no difference, monitors have to meet specific requirements to carry the label, and this all results in a better outcome for consumers.

[MoonSpot]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

They should have, but given they released it at a time when they had less resources to spare and publicity trumped output,  they probably didn't care too much about hardware validation. 

 

I think in hindsight with freesync being basically Async and as such is at the mercy of every company managing to get their little bit right (i.e software to work with the GPU and monitor to be good enough to handle the requirements).  It seems people tend to forget that one of the biggest issues with open standards is that people are free to cut corners.  If AMD wanted to make freesync as solid as gsync then they would have had to do the same thing,  Implement it solely between their GPU Which they control 100% and a feature on a monitor that they also can control 100%.  that way game engines and game software make no difference, monitors have to meet specific requirements to carry the label, and this all results in a better outcome for consumers.

On the business end I think things are a bit more sophisticated than your post seems to indicate.  Looking at Samsung it doesn't seem like they were at all inclined to bloat their B.O.M costs with nvidia, only just now came out with a singular monitor with it at CES.  Them having gone this long paints a pretty clear picture of their thoughts.

Though there is certainly some pains to be had developing their inhouse software to make use of AdaptSync/FreeSync work well, there are a few of the monitor guys whom are keen on doing it if for no other reason than to see G-Sync fail and disappear.

Any monitor manufacturer who also makes televisions, I would think, should want to see Adapt/FreeSync trump nvidias scheme so they can have the same support for both monitors for PC gaming and TVs for consoles.  Plus not having to increase their unit costs quite so dramatically effectively pricing themselves out with non-gamers.

 

Anyways, I don't think that the big companies making screens have been taking the subject lightly(except LG) by 'cutting corners'; and if they did, they didn't for long.