BenQ launching XL2730Z Freesync 144Hz TN; WQHD monitor (Only 40 eur cheaper than Swift)

[Opcode]

Didn't you hear though, freesync is so free. LOL

Apparently you don't know how to read the whole thread. I debunked the theory of FreeSync raising cost on the last page (BenQ official product page backs it up).

[PerfectTemplar]

Apparently you don't know how to read the whole thread. I debunked the theory of FreeSync raising cost on the last page (BenQ official product page backs it up).

Then the cost is high because why not? Lol, ASUS will drop the price of the Swift down to this and when they do how could you say G-sync is more expensive than freesync.

[Opcode]

Then the cost is high because why not? Lol, ASUS will drop the price of the Swift down to this and when they do how could you say G-sync is more expensive than freesync.

A portion of the cost is primarily made up of all the additional hardware and features they packed into the display. If it was just a plain display like the PG278Q it certainly wouldn't cost as much. Tho even with all them extra features and pointless hardware it's still $170 cheaper than the one outlined for comparison. The question is what is the PG278Q offering the consumer for that extra $170.

[megaemil]

I just looked the price up on Komplett.DK here in Denmark. The freesync model of the XL2730Z, which should cost less due to no g-sync module cost 5495dkk, the ROG Swift with the G-sync module costs 5399dkk. Swift is cheaper in DK but i'll still go crazy hwen i can get a monitor with 144hz 1440p g-sync for a reasonable price.

[Faa]

A portion of the cost is primarily made up of all the additional hardware and features they packed into the display. If it was just a plain display like the PG278Q it certainly wouldn't cost as much. Tho even with all them extra features and pointless hardware it's still $170 cheaper than the one outlined for comparison. The question is what is the PG278Q offering the consumer for that extra $170.

Yeah, the only feature that's packed in this thing is a stupid plastic stand to adjust your monitors height & navigate through the osd. Not going to raise the costs by 100-150$.

[Opcode]

Yeah, the only feature that's packed in this thing is a stupid plastic stand to adjust your monitors height & navigate through the osd. Not going to raise the costs by 100-150$.

Raise the cost? The BenQ is $170 cheaper than the PG278Q. Like I said I can cut out easily another $30-50 right from the start for the stand, the remote control and other stuff that's not essential to the display itself (stuff the PG278Q doesn't have). Find me a 27" QHD 144 Hz G-Sync monitor for $580 then we'll talk about how "expensive" FreeSync is. Which is a stupid argument right from the start as FreeSync has no implementation display side. The only thing required for a display to support FreeSync is for the display to support Adaptive-Sync which is a VESA standard. FreeSync itself is entirely a driver implementation. So unless you pay for your AMD drivers then you aren't paying a penny out of pocket for FreeSync.

[Faa]

Raise the cost? The BenQ is $170 cheaper than the PG278Q. Like I said I can cut out easily another $30-50 right from the start for the stand, the remote control and other stuff that's not essential to the display itself (stuff the PG278Q doesn't have). Find me a 27" QHD 144 Hz G-Sync monitor for $580 then we'll talk about how "expensive" FreeSync is. Which is a stupid argument right from the start as FreeSync has no implementation display side. The only thing required for a display to support FreeSync is for the display to support Adaptive-Sync which is a VESA standard. FreeSync itself is entirely a driver implementation. So unless you pay for your AMD drivers then you aren't paying a penny out of pocket for FreeSync.

This is the 6th time you're explaining Freesync being AMD's implentation for Adaptive Sync. I asked you to prove your claims eg 170$ cheaper after you were countered with pretty good evidence, you might as well just make your own news website and use that as a source as you're never able to prove your claims.

[Opcode]

This is the 6th time you're explaining Freesync being AMD's implentation for Adaptive Sync. I asked you to prove your claims eg 170$ cheaper after you were countered with pretty good evidence, you might as well just make your own news website and use that as a source as you're never able to prove your claims.

Um, no. Adaptive-Sync has been around for a while now even before it was pushed to the Display Port 1.2a standard. FreeSync is a implementation into their driver model for regulating Adaptive-Sync displays. Like said AMD has no implementation display side as it relies on Adaptive-Sync. This is why display manufactures aren't advertising their displays as FreeSync displays (even BenQ hasn't) as it's a VESA standard. Which means even Nvidia is free to ditch G-Sync to use it. The difference is AMD is not trying to reinvent the wheel. Adaptive-Sync does what G-Sync does (without overhead) and is already established.

[Faa]

Um, no. Adaptive-Sync has been around for a while now even before it was pushed to the Display Port 1.2a standard. FreeSync is a implementation into their driver model for regulating Adaptive-Sync displays. Like said AMD has no implementation display side as it relies on Adaptive-Sync. This is why display manufactures aren't advertising their displays as FreeSync displays (even BenQ hasn't) as it's a VESA standard. Which means even Nvidia is free to ditch G-Sync to use it. The difference is AMD is not trying to reinvent the wheel. Adaptive-Sync does what G-Sync does (without overhead) and is already established.

O god, do you even read the comments you're responding to?

[Opcode]

O god, do you even read the comments you're responding to?

Of course how else would I conform such solid replies?

[Faa]

Of course how else would I conform such solid replies?

Clearly you're not. You're right about eDP having AS, Freesync being just a driver/GPU support (some cards don't have AS support) implentation for AS, nobody is arguing against this, don't explain it again for the 8th time.

You've been asked to prove AS is 170$ cheaper as the proof that's currently up that's not the case at all.

[Opcode]

Clearly you're not. You're right about eDP having AS, Freesync being just a driver/GPU support (some cards don't have AS support) implentation for AS, nobody is arguing against this, don't explain it again for the 8th time.

You've been asked to prove AS is 170$ cheaper as the proof that's currently up that's not the case at all.

You can't prove that Adaptive-Sync is cheaper without any internal information as to production costs. I personally highly doubt the scalers involved cost no more than the ones already used. What we can prove based on this whole thread is that G-Sync hits your pockets hard in comparison (+$170, same specs, less features).

[Faa]

You can't prove that Adaptive-Sync is cheaper without any internal information as to production costs. I personally highly doubt the scalers involved cost no more than the ones already used. What we can prove based on this whole thread is that G-Sync hits your pockets hard in comparison (+$170, same specs, less features).

170$ isn't 40 eur

[Notional]

A few points I need to make:

1. These monitors use the adaptive sync standards. There might be a small price increase in manufacturing, due to a newer beefier scaler, but AMD has no power over the price set.

2. Adaptive sync is a new standard. Edp had a feature, called variable vblank, used for power saving. This is the tech, both gsync and adaptive sync uses. Freesync is AMD's driver, that utilizes adaptive sync. Adaptive sync and its specs were designed by AMD.

3. The 34" ultra wide LG, um67, costs the same as the um65. 67 has adaptive sync, while 65 does not. That sounds pretty free to me.

4. Because a monitor would be an adaptive sync monitor, with a Hz interval of, let's say, 40-45Hz; AMD decided to make a royalty free program, where vendors can send in their monitors. If the user experience is good, as in a wide Hz interval, they get to use the freesync logo and branding.

Anything else I need to clear up?

[twovaliant2]

Pardon my ignorance, but isn't free sync not available yet?

[CarlosRex]

It's not debatable. Freesync is definitely cheaper than gsync. BenQ is just trying to take advantage of being early to the market.

[Senzelian]

Where can you get that for this price?

Nowhere. But the Price doesn't matter too much for me.

[Faa]

It's not debatable. Freesync is definitely cheaper than gsync. BenQ is just trying to take advantage of being early to the market.

That article means nothing when I provided you pre-order prices. The Iiyama WCFF (or WCCF we it is) was refering to is the Iiyama Prolite B2888UHSU-B1

Iiyama monitors are usually the cheapest out of brands like Asus/Acer/Samsung/Dell/LG etc. Their 4K (without Freesync) is actually 60 eur cheaper than Acer's 4K (without Gsync)

Iiyama B2888UHSU 4K 490 eur; http://nl.hardware.info/productinfo/225027/iiyama-prolite-b2888uhsu-b1#tab:prijzen

Acer 4K without Gsync 550 eur; http://nl.hardware.info/productinfo/241890/acer-b286hkymjdpprz#tab:prijzen

Acer 4K with Gsync 600 eur; http://nl.hardware.info/productinfo/241888/acer-predator-xb280hkbprz#tab:prijzen

So excluding Iiyama's usually cheaper prices (60 eur in this case) we come down again to a silly 40 eur price difference between a Gsync monitor and one that doesn't have Freesync. Gsync is only adding 40 eur apparently, not a lot.

[Giannhs]

A few points I need to make:

1. These monitors use the adaptive sync standards. There might be a small price increase in manufacturing, due to a newer beefier scaler, but AMD has no power over the price set.

2. Adaptive sync is a new standard. Edp had a feature, called variable vblank, used for power saving. This is the tech, both gsync and adaptive sync uses. Freesync is AMD's driver, that utilizes adaptive sync. Adaptive sync and its specs were designed by AMD.

3. The 34" ultra wide LG, um67, costs the same as the um65. 67 has adaptive sync, while 65 does not. That sounds pretty free to me.

4. Because a monitor would be an adaptive sync monitor, with a Hz interval of, let's say, 40-45Hz; AMD decided to make a royalty free program, where vendors can send in their monitors. If the user experience is good, as in a wide Hz interval, they get to use the freesync logo and branding.

Anything else I need to clear up?

so any monitor with adaptive sync can utilise freesync with lets say a driver update or some sort of software?

[Notional]

so any monitor with adaptive sync can utilise freesync with lets say a driver update or some sort of software?

 

Other way around: Freesync drivers can utilize all adaptive sync monitors. As adaptive sync is a standard, no updates or anything needed (freesync was already released in the omega driver),

[Bojamijams]

One thing that everyone is missing is that BenQ gaming monitors support low persistence.  They call it their Blur Reduction but in this case it works with Freesync whereas Gysnc monitors do NOT allow strobed backlighting (low persistence) with Gysnc

[Opcode]

170$ isn't 40 eur

You're looking at preliminary numbers outside of the U.S. which is irrelevant. They both are listed on U.S. retailers for the posted prices in the U.S.

 

It's not debatable. Freesync is definitely cheaper than gsync. BenQ is just trying to take advantage of being early to the market.

Faa is on a hate train against anything that has to do with AMD. He's a die hard Nvidia/Intel fanboy that's about as thick as the walls of the Hoover Dam.

[Glenwing]

One thing that everyone is missing is that BenQ gaming monitors support low persistence. They call it their Blur Reduction but in this case it works with Freesync whereas Gysnc monitors do NOT allow strobed backlighting (low persistence) with Gysnc

Backlight strobing can't be used simultaneously with variable refresh, whether that's G-SYNC or FreeSync. Monitors can support both features (i.e. Acer XB270HU, with ULMB and G-SYNC) but can't use them both together.

BenQ is a really expensive brand to begin with, I'm not surprised if they charge as much for a FreeSync monitor as ASUS does for a G-SYNC one. Be assured if they made the same thing with G-SYNC it would cost even another $150 more than that. This is like the Apple defender comparing Apple prices and specs to a cherry-picked PC competitor like an Alienware and saying "look, Apple isn't charging more than PC for the same specs after all, you pay just as much with a PC!"

Meanwhile Acer is launching the same thing (1440p 144Hz TN FreeSync) for 200 pounds less than the Swift.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-078-AC&emcs0=2&emcs1=Produktdetailseite&emcs2=MO-077-AC&emcs3=MO-078-AC

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-070-AS&emcs0=2&emcs1=Produktdetailseite&emcs2=MO-077-AC&emcs3=MO-070-AS

[Faa]

You're looking at preliminary numbers outside of the U.S. which is irrelevant. They both are listed on U.S. retailers for the posted prices in the U.S.

The 170$ you made (which you were using as a fact) was pulled from here so; http://wccftech.com/amd-freesync-monitor-launched/

"Which costs 500 British pounds at the same e-tailer, roughly $770 USD." Clicking on that link, it's 550 not 500 like they told us. Probably the price raised. Not much of a point comparing the the cheapest available price with a Gsync that's costing on the same store 70£ more than a different store.

http://www.idealo.co.uk/compare/4474896/acer-xb280hk.html

I actually don't know why you'd flip pounds to dollars, in UK they always charge more.

http://www.idealo.co.uk/compare/4535781/intel-core-i7-5960x-box-socket-2011-3-22nm-bx80648i75960x.html

A 5960x which has a MSRP of 1000$/€ costs 800£ in the UK so if you were to buy a 5960x in the UK you'd be paying 200$ more. If someone from the UK would buy from the USA he'd be paying 650£ which is 150£ less, so he's paying 150£ more than he would in the USA or you'd pay 200$ more in the UK.

 

 

Meanwhile Acer is launching the same thing (1440p 144Hz TN FreeSync) for 200 pounds less than the Swift.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-078-AC&emcs0=2&emcs1=Produktdetailseite&emcs2=MO-077-AC&emcs3=MO-078-AC

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-070-AS&emcs0=2&emcs1=Produktdetailseite&emcs2=MO-077-AC&emcs3=MO-070-AS

Nobody will order from overclockers if you can get it from a different store for 110£ less

70£; http://www.idealo.co.uk/go/448554221.html?categoryId=3832&pos=1&price=519.0&productid=4482342&search=Asus+PG278Q&sid=289858&type=offer

There are no prices available for the Acer 1440p 144Hz TN Gsync for a better comparison, their 1440P IPS 144Hz Gsync is only 40 eur more expensive (pre-order price) than the Swift, so the swift is definitely heavily overpriced.

https://www.alternate.de/Acer/27-L-Predator-XB270HUbprz-G-Sync/html/product/1181210?campaign=Monitor/Acer/1181210

[Opcode]

The 170$ you made (which you were using as a fact) was pulled from here so; http://wccftech.com/amd-freesync-monitor-launched/

"Which costs 500 British pounds at the same e-tailer, roughly $770 USD." Clicking on that link, it's 550 not 500 like they told us. Probably the price raised. Not much of a point comparing the the cheapest available price with a Gsync that's costing on the same store 70£ more than a different store.

http://www.idealo.co.uk/compare/4474896/acer-xb280hk.html

I actually don't know why you'd flip pounds to dollars, in UK they always charge more.

http://www.idealo.co.uk/compare/4535781/intel-core-i7-5960x-box-socket-2011-3-22nm-bx80648i75960x.html

A 5960x which has a MSRP of 1000$/€ costs 800£ in the UK so if you were to buy a 5960x in the UK you'd be paying 200$ more. If someone from the UK would buy from the USA he'd be paying 650£ which is 150£ less, so he's paying 150£ more than he would in the USA or you'd pay 200$ more in the UK.

Nope, my prices were pulled from a U.S. retailer. No one cares about U.K. pricing.

 

P.S. You can buy the Swift in America right now (it's been for sale for a while). Not sure where the hell you're "pre-order" propaganda is coming from.