FreeSync FAQ Released - pretty disappointing

[Notional]

 

Nvidia swapped the monitors Scaler with Gsync and Gsync doesnt have a hardware scaler. Like I said the scaler for DP1.2a will have a limited dynamic refresh rate (its 50-60Hz on EDP laptops), maybe 40-60 on DP1.2A hence why AMD didnt have the balls to show the refresh rate on their presentation. It's so obvious it's farrrrrrr from finished. You need an ASIC chip to have a wide range of dynamic refresh rate, there's no other solution or nvidia would have done this that's quite obvious.

 

Calling it Freesync isnt enough evidence? Like I said above, VESA AC & AMD Freesync are two different things. Freesync only uses a few features of VESA AC, to have 0-144Hz orsomething you need an ASIC chip and this chip will never be standard on any DP1.2a 80$ monitor. Freesync will be an option just like Gsync with an extra cost and you will pay more for it than a regular monitor with vesa ac. AMD isn't offering anything free.

They brainwashed people nicely making people think vesa ac is the same as freesync and we know vesa stuff are always standard making people think its free and they even came up with a firmware update would support it.

 

Monitor manufacturers don't need AMD's help at all for Vesa Adaptive Sync and why would they need AMD for it but they do need AMD's help for Freesync.

 

 

First it's not a scaler and second Asus is only useful for supplying monitors.

 

 

• Fine let's not call it a scaler then, but a Single-chip enhanced multi-function LCD monitor controller then. Happy? 
• Limited dynamic refresh rate?

   

  Using DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync, the graphics card can detect and set an appropriate maximum and minimum refresh rate based on the capabilities reported by the display. Potential ranges include 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz.

  G-sync can only handle 30-144hz. Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2014/05/12/amds-project-freesync-gets-momentum-as-adaptive-sync-gets-added-to-displayport-spec/

• No, calling it freesync is not enough for your misunderstood criticism. The free part is, and has always been, about 0 royalty license fees for manufacturers using Freesync/adaptive sync. It is also free for consumers to get cia driver updates. Obvously it requires hardware support. AMD has never claimed anything else, nor has any other hardware vendors/manufacturers.
• Who said a 80$ monitor will have Adaptive Sync? Of course an Adaptive Sync monitor will have a price premium, but AMD is not seing a single $ for it. So yeah Freesync IS offered for free by AMD. You are mixing manufacturers, standardizations, hardware and AMD together in one big bowl.
• You DO understand, that Adaptive Sync, was pitched by AMD to VESA group, that then accepted it, right? AS is NOT AMD exclusive, but a technical industry standard in Displayport 1.2a. Which means, that both Intel and Nvidia can support it too.
• Monitor manufacturers don't need AMD? (Same forbes link)

•  

  AMD has undertaken every necessary effort to enable Project FreeSync in the display ecosystem. Monitor vendors are now integrating the DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync specification and productizing compatible displays. AMD is working closely with these vendors to bring products to market, and we expect compatible monitors within 6-12 months.

   

[mr moose]

Opportunity and actually taking the opportunity are 2 different things entirely.

 

Technically yes but in reality no.  Interviews are not sprung on them out of the blue, they have time to prepare, and I can guarantee they prepare a sales pitch, because if they don't give one they get demoted.  Companies (and I have first hand experience with this) send sales guys to do interviews. they may be engineers but they are trained to do sales.

[Brainless906]

Lets take lots of things out of context and then sensationalize it! THEN ill go ahead and TELL those amd fanfags to come after me thus justifyin' my non-objective position! Fanboy circlejerk continue!!!!!!!!!



A slight redesign to a pcb/connection type isnt the same as addin a whole new unit to process and cache a frame. You can call it freesync because its rolled into a standard for a new output on display port....which you would have been paying for anyways.....and lets not all decide that were paying for the freesync and the new version of display port is the free bonus.   

You want a new display with Gsync unit and the new version of DP? My monies on your gonna pay for both of those additions vs paying for a monitor with JUST the new display port standard that will come WITH freesync ability. 

[ttam]

Whoa. We have a lot of desk jockey at home experts on the forum. Didn't know all you guys were lead researchers for AMD and nVidia....

[mr moose]

 

 

• No, calling it freesync is not enough for your misunderstood criticism. The free part is, and has always been, about 0 royalty license fees for manufacturers using Freesync/adaptive sync. It is also free for consumers to get cia driver updates.

 

Given the context it gets used in by not just media but in the way AMD have used it it reeks of marketing.   AMD's marketing style is to seed bits of information that point to one thing but not enough information to confirm and then lets the internet media get carried away.  Classic examples have been the mantle hype and the 9000 series hype.  With this they simply called it "freesync" from the get go, no other word or description as such, just freesync. Have a read through all the articles and find a quote from AMD that actually gives any details:

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7641/amd-demonstrates-freesync-free-gsync-alternative-at-ces-2014

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Variable-Refresh-FreeSync-Could-Be-Alternative-NVIDIA-G-Sync

http://www.pcper.com/news/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Demonstrates-Prototype-FreeSync-Monitor-DisplayPort-Adaptive-Sync-Feature

http://www.kitguru.net/peripherals/monitors/anton-shilov/amd-demonstrates-the-first-freesync-display-prototype/

 

 

This is why so many people thought that freesync was free (as in no cost to them), when freesync is AMD's implementation of adaptive sync (which is the industry standard AMD pushed for).  So freesync has little to do with royalty free use of adaptive sync as it is tied to GCN 1.1 cards.  

[Faa]

Fine let's not call it a scaler then, but a Single-chip enhanced multi-function LCD monitor controller then. Happy? 

Okay?

 

Limited dynamic refresh rate?

Vesa Adaptive sync is ported from EDP to dp1.2a

Adaptive-Sync is a proven and widely adopted technology. The technology has been a standard component of VESA’s embedded DisplayPort (eDP™) specification since its initial rollout in 2009. As a result, Adaptive-Sync technology is already incorporated into many of the building block components for displays that rely on eDP for internal video signaling. Newly introduced to the DisplayPort 1.2a specification for external displays, this technology is now formally known as DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync.

http://www.vesa.org/news/vesa-adds-adaptive-sync-to-popular-displayport-video-standard/

 

 

No, calling it freesync is not enough for your misunderstood criticism. The free part is, and has always been, about 0 royalty license fees for manufacturers using Freesync/adaptive sync. It is also free for consumers to get cia driver updates. Obvously it requires hardware support. AMD has never claimed anything else, nor has any other hardware vendors/manufacturers.

No Displayport 1.2a is free for Vesa members for monitor manufacturers and nvidia is a vesa member.

Implementation of DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync is offered to VESA members without any license fee.

Now lets see:

The seamless refresh rate switching, provided the OS supports it, enables embedded Displayport panels to go from 60Hz down to 50Hz or 40Hz and back up dynamically depending on the power management policy defined, which can also save over 100 milliwatts per panel without having to change the link clock speed. And, a smaller wire count with a smaller connector saves more space in a compact notebook enclosure.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/feature/1603027/low-power-laptops-embedded-displayport

AMD even admitted Freesync is AMD's unique hardware/software solution: Project FreeSync is a unique AMD hardware/software solution that utilizes DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync protocols to enable user-facing benefits: smooth, tearing-free and low-latency gameplay and video. 

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/2014/05/12/vesa-adds-adaptive-sync-displayport-1-2-standard/

Clearly pointing out they aren't only using the DP1.2a scalar, you clearly need more than just vesa AC to have a range between 0-144Hz (whatever they claimed) which is in this case an ASIC chip which costs a shitload. It doesn't make any sense saying that vesa adaptive sync is Freesync and AMD calling it free because vesa's license is free for their members and with a nice pricetax for their asic chip.

Why would AMD copypaste it literally and rename it to AMD Freesync and tell us in secret that its their own unique hardware? 

 

Who said a 80$ monitor will have Adaptive Sync? Of course an Adaptive Sync monitor will have a price premium, but AMD is not seing a single $ for it. So yeah Freesync IS offered for free by AMD. You are mixing manufacturers, standardizations, hardware and AMD together in one big bowl.

Any monitor with DP1.2a will have AC. Freesync which requires an auxilary chip (asic) will be only available obviously on gaming advertised monitors.

 

 

Which means, that both Intel and Nvidia can support it too.

A range of 40-60Hz is useless.

 

 

Monitor manufacturers don't need AMD? (Same forbes link)

Why would they need AMD for vesa adaptive sync when it already exists on laptops since 2009. They only need AMD for Freesync not for Vesa adaptive sync. 

[theroflcopta]

I don't think anyone was naive enough to think this would literally be free. Of course it would be an onboard chip on monitors the "free" part of it comes from it being open source. 

[mr moose]

I don't think anyone was naive enough to think this would literally be free. Of course it would be an onboard chip on monitors the "free" part of it comes from it being open source. 

 

Open source is irrelevant if it can only be used with GCN 1.1 cards. Ergo the naming of it as "freesync" is a misnomer.

[LAwLz]

I don't think anyone was naive enough to think this would literally be free. Of course it would be an onboard chip on monitors the "free" part of it comes from it being open source. 

But it's not open source... The drivers are closed source.

The VESA specifications for Adaptive-Sync are royalty-free but we don't know what changes AMD will make to it before branding it as "FreeSync".

[theroflcopta]

Open source is irrelevant if it can only be used with GCN 1.1 cards. Ergo the naming of it as "freesync" is a misnomer.

 

But it's not open source... The drivers are closed source.

The VESA specifications for Adaptive-Sync are royalty-free but we don't know what changes AMD will make to it before branding it as "FreeSync".

Ah okay gotcha. I guess I just am not surprised since I was expecting as much : /

[Notional]

Vesa Adaptive sync is ported from EDP to dp1.2a

Adaptive-Sync is a proven and widely adopted technology. The technology has been a standard component of VESA’s embedded DisplayPort (eDP™) specification since its initial rollout in 2009. As a result, Adaptive-Sync technology is already incorporated into many of the building block components for displays that rely on eDP for internal video signaling. Newly introduced to the DisplayPort 1.2a specification for external displays, this technology is now formally known as DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync.

 

 

eDP does not have Adaptive Sync, it has Variable Vblank, that both Adpative Sync and G-sync utilizes for variable framerates. Adaptive Sync utilizes variable vblanks, but is NOT the same thing, with the same standards and same limits. You have misunderstood something here.

 

The seamless refresh rate switching, provided the OS supports it, enables embedded Displayport panels to go from 60Hz down to 50Hz or 40Hz and back up dynamically depending on the power management policy defined, which can also save over 100 milliwatts per panel without having to change the link clock speed. And, a smaller wire count with a smaller connector saves more space in a compact notebook enclosure.

 

 

Your hz intervals are for eDP, using variable vblanks standardization, and are completely irrelevant for Adaptive Sync intervals and limitations. Allow me to (once again) present you with what we are going to see with Freesync/adaptive sync:

 

Using DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync, the graphics card can detect and set an appropriate maximum and minimum refresh rate based on the capabilities reported by the display. Potential ranges include 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz.

 Source: http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/freesync-faq.aspx

 

Why would AMD pitch an "Adaptive Sync" standard that would only do 40-60hz? They wouldn't, stop trolling.

 

AMD even admitted Freesync is AMD's unique hardware/software solution: Project FreeSync is a unique AMD hardware/software solution that utilizes DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync protocols to enable user-facing benefits: smooth, tearing-free and low-latency gameplay and video. 

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/2014/05/12/vesa-adds-adaptive-sync-displayport-1-2-standard/

 

 

"Admitted". Such rhetoric implies foul play. AMD has always gone for standardization, and Free sync is no exception. That is why AMD opted for the hardware to be a standard, instead of a proprietary implementation like Nvidia. How the GPU, drivers, games etc. manages to achieve variable framerate, is irrelevant, as long as the signals sent to the display using Adaptive Sync, upholds to the standard. The former is Free Sync, as in the driver/software implementation of AMD. That's why I wrote in another post, that Nvidia could reuse their G-sync branding, as a software/driver implementation, and use it with Adaptive Sync, scrapping all the G-sync hardware. If they wanted to that is.

 

Clearly pointing out they aren't only using the DP1.2a scalar, you clearly need more than just vesa AC to have a range between 0-144Hz (whatever they claimed) which is in this case an ASIC chip which costs a shitload. It doesn't make any sense saying that vesa adaptive sync is Freesync and AMD calling it free because vesa's license is free for their members and with a nice pricetax for their asic chip.

 

Please define how much a "shitload" is for an ASIC? And what YOU think an ASIC even is? G-sync is an ASIC , actually more specfically a SoC. ALL monitors have an IC controller in them, that contains video processing, scaler, OSD, etc, and because they are made solely as a controller for the monitor, they can be defined as Application Specific Integrated Circuit; even your 80$ monitor has one. The development of a new ASIC LCD controller might initially have a high sunk cost, but as they cover millions of monitors sold, scale of economics makes them cheap is skittles.

 

 Why would AMD copypaste it literally and rename it to AMD Freesync and tell us in secret that its their own unique hardware? 

 

AMD never said Freesync would be hardware. On the contrary, they said they would shoot for a standard, NOT a proprietary tech in free sync. And again, AMD pitched "adaptive sync" to VESA, after they revealed Freesync. So who/what is copy pasting?

 

 Any monitor with DP1.2a will have AC. Freesync which requires an auxilary chip (asic) will be only available obviously on gaming advertised monitors. 

 

 

Adaptive sync is optional in Displayport 1.2a. It is NOT mandatory.

 

A range of 40-60Hz is useless.

 

Indeed, which is why neither Adaptive Sync, nor Freesync only runs at 40-60hz (look at quite further up).

 

Why would they need AMD for vesa adaptive sync when it already exists on laptops since 2009. They only need AMD for Freesync not for Vesa adaptive sync. 

 

Because monitor manufacturers, might not have any knowledge of eDP, utilizing Variable Vblanks or create the initial plug and play handshake, Adaptive Sync requires. And again, Varibale VBlanks is NOT Adaptive Sync.

[Faa]

 

eDP does not have Adaptive Sync, it has Variable Vblank, that both Adpative Sync and G-sync utilizes for variable framerates. Adaptive Sync utilizes variable vblanks, but is NOT the same thing, with the same standards and same limits. You have misunderstood something here.

Dude really? 

Adaptive-Sync is a proven and widely adopted technology. The technology has been a standard component of VESA’s embedded DisplayPort (eDP™) specification since its initial rollout in 2009. As a result, Adaptive-Sync technology is already incorporated into many of the building block components for displays that rely on eDP for internal video signaling. Newly introduced to the DisplayPort 1.2a specification for external displays, this technology is now formally known as DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync.

http://www.vesa.org/news/vesa-adds-adaptive-sync-to-popular-displayport-video-standard/

It's been since 2009. Even AMD themself admitted it here: DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync is a new addition to the DisplayPort™ 1.2a specification, ported from the embedded DisplayPort™ v1.0 specification. DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync provides an industry-standard mechanism that enables real-time adjustment of a monitor’s refresh rate of a display over a DisplayPort™ link.

Also you're complety wrong about vblank; 

When asked about a potential VESA standard to enable dynamic refresh rates, Petersen had something very interesting to say: he doesn't think it's necessary, because DisplayPort already supports "everything required" for dynamic refresh rates via the extension of the vblank interval. That's why, he noted, G-Sync works with existing cables without the need for any new standards. Nvidia sees no need and has no plans to approach VESA about a new standard for G-Sync-style functionality—because it already exists.

http://techreport.com/news/25878/nvidia-responds-to-amd-free-sync-demo

 

 

Please define how much a "shitload" is for an ASIC? And what YOU think an ASIC even is? G-sync is an ASIC , actually more specfically a SoC. ALL monitors have an IC controller in them, that contains video processing, scaler, OSD, etc, and because they are made solely as a controller for the monitor, they can be defined as Application Specific Integrated Circuit; even your 80$ monitor has one. The development of a new ASIC LCD controller might initially have a high sunk cost, but as they cover millions of monitors sold, scale of economics makes them cheap is skittles.

To be correct it's not an asic chip, it's a FPGA chip, ebay them you'd be lucky to find them below 500$. Theyre always expensive and the question is still unanswered how nvidia managed to make it so cheap. Without that chip, you won't have a dynamic range of 0-144Hz. If we would believe that vesa ac supports 0-144Hz why the hell didnt nvidia take advantage of it?

To his knowledge, no scaler ASIC with variable refresh capability exists—and if it did, he said, "we would know." Nvidia's intent in building the G-Sync module was to enable this capability and thus to nudge the industry in the right direction.

You aren't getting 0-144Hz without an fpga or nvidia would have done it.

 

 

Why would AMD pitch an "Adaptive Sync" standard that would only do 40-60hz? They wouldn't, stop trolling.

Because it's needed for Freesync. After the presentation they did a QA, they clearly admitted that Freesync and adaptive sync are two different things -> http://www.brightsideofnews.com/2014/05/12/vesa-adds-adaptive-sync-displayport-1-2-standard/

You should answer my question; why didnt they show the refresh rate during their presentation? O wait, they just showed how EDP works and made people think their technology that doesnt exist yet is free. For the 50th time, they're NOT just re-using vesa's technology and putting their name on it and leaving it like that.

 

 

Because monitor manufacturers, might not have any knowledge of eDP, utilizing Variable Vblanks or create the initial plug and play handshake, Adaptive Sync requires. And again, Varibale VBlanks is NOT Adaptive Sync.

Question was why do they need AMD's help for a technology from a complete different brand? >.>

 

 

Indeed, which is why neither Adaptive Sync, nor Freesync only runs at 40-60hz (look at quite further up).

"FreeSync" monitor with the DisplayPort 1.2a Adaptive Sync feature at work. Though they aren't talking about what monitor it is or who the manufacturer is, the demo is up and running and functions with frame rates wavering between 40 FPS and 60 FPS 

http://www.pcper.com/news/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Demonstrates-Prototype-FreeSync-Monitor-DisplayPort-Adaptive-Sync-Feature

[SkulD]

 

1. Do you know any scaler manufacturers, any news about any scalers from anything ever? Scaler manufacturers purely operate on a b2b market. They make specialized scalers for their customers, I doubt you will ever hear anything about them ever.
2. In comparison? 200£ ~338$ 360£ ~609$, so the difference in your own example is about 270$ A simple spec difference in a scaler will not result in such a huge difference, even with a price premium launch price og Adaptive Sync.
3. They showed a functional proof of concept Adaptive Sync monitor at computex. It was a simple scaler firmware upgrade, that could make it use adaptive sync from 40-60hz. The new scalers being made can handle more (the adaptive sync standard supports 9-240hz).
4. Variable Vblank came about as a power savings feature. Adaptive sync came about as a variable framerate tech identical to g-sync, both using variable vblank. Such a simple standard change will definitely cost less than 270$ price premium to the end user.

 

Im at page 4 right now, and the thing I noticed is that no one has directly quoted you to "prove you wrong".

 

Thanks for all the information .

 

 

 

 

 

PD:I own a r9 280x and a GTX760, so f*ck off anyone trying to put me on a team.

[LAwLz]

Im at page 4 right now, and the thing I noticed is that no one has directly quoted you to "prove you wrong".

 

Thanks for all the information .

The reason nobody can prove him wrong is because it's mostly speculation.

 

Point 2 is just pointing out that someone got pounds and USD mixed up, but with some extra speculation thrown in at the end. He doesn't have any idea how much it will cost when it's released and neither does anyone else. It might cost 270 dollars, and it might not. Nobody knows until monitors hit the market.

 

Point 3 is just what Faa has been saying (Adaptive-Sync/Freesync only being able to do 40-60Hz without more expensive hardware). Sadly, AMD also said that chances are you won't be able to upgrade your existing monitor, and even if you somehow do you will probably only get 40-60Hz (which is kind of pointless). I am not even sure if the average Joe can upgrade the monitor firmware. Even monitors with USB ports probably just have the ports as pass through.

 

Point 4 is just the same as point 2 again. He does not know what monitor manufacturers will charge for it, and neither does anyone else. It's just speculation. The only change anyone would have to argue against him would be with a time machine. I mean, if I said "it will cost 300 dollars" nobody could argue against me either.

[PopReference]

Whoa. We have a lot of desk jockey at home experts on the forum. Didn't know all you guys were lead researchers for AMD and nVidia....

Very well PR trained ones at that. Conversations that read as fallows:

 

AMD: "GREEN are dicks, come at me bro!"

 

Nvidia: "We don't care what RED does.(but they are the dicks)"

 

ps: inb4 thread locked

[Notional]

Adaptive-Sync is a proven and widely adopted technology. The technology has been a standard component of VESA’s embedded DisplayPort (eDP™) specification since its initial rollout in 2009. As a result, Adaptive-Sync technology is already incorporated into many of the building block components for displays that rely on eDP for internal video signaling. Newly introduced to the DisplayPort 1.2a specification for external displays, this technology is now formally known as DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync.

http://www.vesa.org/news/vesa-adds-adaptive-sync-to-popular-displayport-video-standard/

It's been since 2009. Even AMD themself admitted it here: DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync is a new addition to the DisplayPort™ 1.2a specification, ported from the embedded DisplayPort™ v1.0 specification. DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync provides an industry-standard mechanism that enables real-time adjustment of a monitor’s refresh rate of a display over a DisplayPort™ link.

 

I've read the announcement as well, and understand the confusion. However the term, name, whatever "adaptive sync" has never been a part of eDP. The power savings feature IS variable vblank. Don't believe me? I have a challenge for you:

Google "Adaptive Sync", go to search tools and set a custom time range for 2009-2012. Let me know how many hits you find.

 

Adaptive Sync works by using variable vblanks and works like this:

 

Monitor does not run at fixed intervals of frame scans. So the gfx sends an image, the monitor scans it, and shows it. At the end of the image sent from the gfx, comes a vblank start signal. This tells the monitor to not scan for further images. When the gfx at some point has finished the next frame, it will send a vblank end signal, followed by the image. This is how G-sync works and how Adpative Sync works.

 

This is essentially how variable vblank is used as a power savings feature in eDP; as in putting the panel in stasis, until the gfx sends a new picture. As you pointed out, eDP's tech only supports 40-60fps. This is not the case with Adaptive Sync (if it was, freesync would not be able to use other intervals, as they clearly state they can).

 

Also you're complety wrong about vblank; 

When asked about a potential VESA standard to enable dynamic refresh rates, Petersen had something very interesting to say: he doesn't think it's necessary, because DisplayPort already supports "everything required" for dynamic refresh rates via the extension of the vblank interval. That's why, he noted, G-Sync works with existing cables without the need for any new standards. Nvidia sees no need and has no plans to approach VESA about a new standard for G-Sync-style functionality—because it already exists.

 

So the spokesman for Nvidia don't believe DP needs a new standard, that would make their new tech redundant? What a shock! When Nvidia uses this much proprietary tech, as they do in G-sync, they go beyond the specs of Display Port. So IF variable frame rates, shoule become standard, the functionality needs to be part of the standard. Like I've said many times, G-Sync also utilizes variable vblanks, but that does not mean it's part of the DP 1.2 non a spec. You need a G-sync module for a reason, and that is because the go beoynd the DP spec (which is the reason to add Adaptive Sync to DP).

 

 

To be correct it's not an asic chip, it's a FPGA chip, ebay them you'd be lucky to find them below 500$. Theyre always expensive and the question is still unanswered how nvidia managed to make it so cheap. Without that chip, you won't have a dynamic range of 0-144Hz. If we would believe that vesa ac supports 0-144Hz why the hell didnt nvidia take advantage of it?

To his knowledge, no scaler ASIC with variable refresh capability exists—and if it did, he said, "we would know." Nvidia's intent in building the G-Sync module was to enable this capability and thus to nudge the industry in the right direction.

You aren't getting 0-144Hz without an fpga or nvidia would have done it.

 

FPGA is just another type of IC. These are just definitions based one how the IC is made to work. An Adaptive Sync supported monitor controller, does not necessarily, have to be an ASIC, it can surely be a generic IC, FPGA, ASIC, SoC, etc. You make it sound like an IC (or at least an ASIC) is a 500$ component. Are you out of your mind? A Titan Black GPU core is hardly a 500$ component, come on, don't be silly. Ebay prices has nothing to do with b2b prices in mass production.

 

You are right about one thing: No monitor controller can do Adpative Sync fully (which is why Adaptive Sync became a standard). That is why no monitor with AS is on the market. That is what AMD is working with the controller/monitor manufacturers, to make, and should have functioning prototypes ready for manufactruring, this year.

 

How do you know that kind of IC is necessary to get such an interval? Or even the cost of it

 

 

Because it's needed for Freesync. After the presentation they did a QA, they clearly admitted that Freesync and adaptive sync are two different things -> http://www.brightsideofnews.com/2014/05/12/vesa-adds-adaptive-sync-displayport-1-2-standard/

 

 

Again, "admitted" is a rhetoric implying foul play. Cheap discussion trick.

AMD could have made Freesync just like G-sync, with its own proprietary hardware. They chose not to, but instead strive for industry standards for broader adoption. Adaptive Sync is the result of this hardware industry standard, pitched by AMD themselves.

Freesync is now just the software implementation of the hardware standard AMD got into the DP standard.

 

 

You should answer my question; why didnt they show the refresh rate during their presentation? O wait, they just showed how EDP works and made people think their technology that doesnt exist yet is free. For the 50th time, they're NOT just re-using vesa's technology and putting their name on it and leaving it like that. 

 

Didn't they? The computex demo was an off the shelf monitor that got controller firmware upgraded to work with freesync. Nothing more, the hardware controller was not capable of doing more than 40-60hz (why would a monitor need that?). That is why new Adaptive Sync controllers are being developed.

 

I agree, they are NOT just re using VESA technology, because Adaptive Sync is more than just variable vblank support in DP.

 

 

Question was why do they need AMD's help for a technology from a complete different brand? >.>

 

 

"FreeSync" monitor with the DisplayPort 1.2a Adaptive Sync feature at work. Though they aren't talking about what monitor it is or who the manufacturer is, the demo is up and running and functions with frame rates wavering between 40 FPS and 60 FPS

 

Because the controller and monitor manufacturers do not make controllers and monitor that use variable vblank and/or don't yet know how to do the Adaptive Sync handshake communication, or how the frame/vblank signals will be revieced from the gfx, per AS standards? I don't know what they want help from, but AMD claim, they are supplying it.

 

As for the second part, I answered it in the paragraph above.

 

Im at page 4 right now, and the thing I noticed is that no one has directly quoted you to "prove you wrong".

 

Thanks for all the information .

 

Thank you, I try to use sources and facts as much as possible. If I speculate, I try to argue the reason behind it. I am however wrong sometimes too. In the quote, I call it a scaler, when the real name is controller (containing scaler, video processing, osd, etc.). 

 

The reason nobody can prove him wrong is because it's mostly speculation.

 

Indeed. All prices are purely speculative. However, I estimate a lower price than G-sync, based on less hardware needed to achieve Adaptive sync (lack of monitor ram and other proprietary Nvidia tech), plus that due to it's standardization, the initial investment (sunk cost) of developing a Adaptive Sync compatible Controller, will be split over many more monitors, than G-sync (scale of economics), driving down the price. But I did admit it will come at a price premium. The currency thing, was very relevant, as his point was a "small" 100$ premium turned out to be 2,7 times larger.

 

Very well PR trained ones at that. Conversations that read as fallows:

 

AMD: "GREEN are dicks, come at me bro!"

 

Nvidia: "We don't care what RED does.(but they are the dicks)"

 

ps: inb4 thread locked

 

Actually this is the kind of trolling post, that offtracks a very good discussion and get threads locked. Only when the discussion gets a little heated, will all the facts and knowledge come out. If there is no room for these discussions, this forum ends up being superficial in knowledge, and I hope the admins will not run the forum that way. I'm already dissapointed that the last thread the other day got locked: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/187305-nvidia-responds-to-amd-allegations/

 

So admins, please remove dumb posts, but let the good threads continue.

[smpk]

Wow I never noticed that...

The 295x2 is 150% the price of two 290xs

The Titan z is 150% the price of two Titan Blacks

The 295x2  has a more expensive cooler?

[Enderman]

The 295x2  has a more expensive cooler?

Nope, they just went the cheap route by sticking a cheap AiO on it. The titan Z rather has a much better performing cooler that is only air, looks better, and is much more optimised

[bogus]

Nope, they just went the cheap route by sticking a cheap AiO on it. The titan Z rather has a much better performing cooler that is only air, looks better, and is much more optimised

You guys have no immunity to marketing? You just swallow it all lolol

[Syntaxvgm]

6.jpg

@TheSLSAMG 

And kills the 3000$ titan z

[Enderman]

And kills the 3000$ titan z

Nope.

[Syntaxvgm]

Nope.

The benchmark you posted was close for a half cost card, AND you cherry picked it. 95% ones I saw had it beating the titan z, and by a much higher margin. 

What's sad is the titan black sli beats the titan z and 295x2 by a long shot. If they made the titanz right it would be a real winner. 

I even found most digital storm 4k benchmarks like you chose proved this too

In fact,

that;s the first benchmark I've seen of the titan z beating the 295x2. The tech new writers and becnhmarkers were in consensus about the 295x2 beating the titan z. Which is really disappointing, I expect better from nvidia. 

In the future please don't cherry pick. 

[mr moose]

So is no body going to talk about the actual topic or are you all going to fanboy over cards none of can afford?  There is no need to post over sized graphs of benchmarks that mean very little and then accuse each other of trolling because their over sized picture disagrees with yours.

 

 

If there is one thing that I hope all this freesync v gsync does, is that I hope it will push down the price of monitors that support neither.  If I can get a bog stock 1080p panel cheaper because everyone is tripping over themselves to upgrade to an X-sync panel, I will be in heaven. 

[Syntaxvgm]

So is no body going to talk about the actual topic or are you all going to fanboy over cards none of can afford?  There is no need to post over sized graphs of benchmarks that mean very little and then accuse each other of trolling because their over sized picture disagrees with yours.

well I kinda got mad that he cherry picked 2 benchmarks out of like 10 on that same site just to be a fanboy of NVIDIA/prove me wrong/be right idk. I'm actually an NVIDIA fanboy for many reasons, but I can't stand when people flat out lie becuase they can't fathom that other compnay(ies) can do something right, like the 295X2. We are PC enthusiasts, we should be above those console fanboys. 

 

 

I didn't however comment on this article though. I think it's skewing facts to keep on the AMD hate train that I unfortuntly take part in from time to time, especially on the CPU end, but I try to be fair as possible. 

That said the "FreeSync" name is pretty stupid, keeping Adaptive Sync would have been much better, and something Nvidia would be much more willing to make their cards compatible with, even if they kept up Gsync. The name "FreeSync" is a slap in their faces in a way, though Gsync is a slap to anyone with a non NVIDIA card, though understandable. I have really, really liked the idea ever since I saw Gsync in action, and I really hope both AMD and NVidia get this right, as I don't want to see proprietary crap that won't get mainstream support.

 

As far as I see it, as long as this new Dp standard is used, you are good to go without any extra boards or licensing fees for the manufacture. There's nothing wrong with this so far, IDK why everyone's panties are in a wad over it. If NVIDIA chooses to implement the AdaptiveSync standard, and by that I mean you will be able to get an Adaptive sync monitor and use it with FreeSync or Gsync, this will be a great win for all PC gamers. 

[Syntaxvgm]

And the difference is Nvidia gsync already exists and works and is 100% reliable.

The 'no proprietary software or hardware' crap that AMD describes freesync as when it was revealed is just a bunch of lies.

 

In the end it will end up being the same as gsync, where you need a special monitor that supports it.

except this will be a new DP standard that all gaming monitors will have, no licensing fees, just minor DP changes. This will be open for NVIDIA to make it work with their cards.

Of course with new display standards you can't use old monitors. But most monitors will have adaptive sync, for 2 reasons-

1. It's a vesa standard.

2. No licensing fees like the ones for gsync. 

3. It's not locked to one manufacturer, like Gsync is. 

4. It builds on display port standards, which revisions of have been implemented in the past. 

So really there's no reason not to add it if you were a manufacturer. In the end, NVIDIA will have to adapt (hah pun) to adaptivesync. They'll still call it Gync probably, but it will support the vesa standard. 

And this is good. 

As an NVIDIA guy, I really hope they get on board with this. I want to keep on NVIDIA cards for the awesome game streaming. I want to buy a monitor with a universal,open, license fee free vesa standard. Not some monitor that costs more due to NVIDIA license fees that I can only take advantage of with NVIDIA cards. 

Honestly, I don't see Gync monitors as a lasting thing because of this being a vesa standing with no fees. I think there will be limited selection for Gsync monitors, but a large selection of A-Sync monitors.