AMD FreeSync Drivers And Monitors Are Available

[Sammael]

Well done, analyzing market share and concluding fanboys.  get with reality.    If someone has a keppler or later GPU then it is cheaper for them to buy a gsync monitor than it is to buy and AMD GPU and freesync monitor.   This is not being a fanboy this is being rational.

 

 

If they had a kepler gpu they would not need to upgrade to a 960 to use gsync, that chart shows sales of a 960 being dominant.  Is it really that much more dominant performance wise over an amd 285?  Are you really going to try and argue that the reason it sells so much better is because those people wanted to couple it with gsync monitors?  Even if that's true, buying a 960 + a gsync monitor vs buying an amd 285 plus a freesync variant would cost LESS for roughly the same performance.

 

So why is the 960 so dominant?  They have, More, FANBOYS.  This is so obvious to the point where I feel silly having to defend this point.  Why is that news so hurtful to you?  You fight against it tooth and nail?  Why?  Do you think acknowledging that takes away from nvidias dominance?  It doesn't, it's still there, they were able to convince more people that their stuff was better.  But perhaps you want to hold onto the idea that the primary reason people were convinced was because it actually WAS better.  If that last is what you are holding onto (like that Allen guy from pcper wanting all things nvidia to be technically superior unless there is no wiggle room)  then you are letting your own nvidia bias cloud your views.  

[Faa]

And freesync is free of licensing fees. 

So is Gsync. Manufacturers are only paying for the module which is around 40-60$. Also driver support + GPU being compatible shouldn't be advertised as license free.

 

 

Wow lol... just wow... from that sentence you got the conclusion that Freesync introduces ghosting? I mean...

There's no such thing as Freesync, another term in the form of Retina.

 

Anyway, I found an old pcper video that highlights more of their own nvidia bias:

 

How are you exactly biased if you proved it with a video you can't say no to? They've gone in depth why they prefer Gsync, mainly because of the VRR zone being much better; http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Displays/AMD-FreeSync-First-Impressions-and-Technical-Discussion/Inside-and-Outside-VRR-Wind

 

[ivan134]

-snip

Add this guy from Tech Report to the list of reviewers with Nvidia bias.

 

http://techreport.com/review/27702/nvidia-geforce-gtx-960-graphics-card-reviewed/5

 

 

 

 

 

The GTX 960 starts off with a pretty astounding performance in Far Cry 4. However you want to cut it—the frame time plots, the simple FPS average, or our time-sensitive 99th percentile frame time metric—the GTX 960 looks to be every bit the equal of the GeForce GTX 770. To be clear, the GTX 770 is based on a fully-enabled GK104 chip and is essentially the same thing as the GeForce GTX 680, which was selling for $499 a few short years ago. The GTX 770 has almost double the memory bandwidth of the 960, yet here we are.

 

He blatantly ignores the elephant in the room that shows Nvidia is back to their old tricks of gimping their older products to make their new ones seem much better than they really are compared to the old ones, and starts talking about frame time. This graph from the same review shows how a 960 and 760 should be performing relative to a 770 and 270x, respectively. They're both Nvidia partnered games so I wonder what the excuse is.

 

 

Nvidia knows most people buying new cards, tend to look at new games to decide and not ones running old engines like Borderlands Pre Sequel. Hopefully @Faa can add this tidbit to his crusade against GPU manufacturers gimping certain aspects of their products to make others seem better, the same way he accuses AMD of gimping their dx11 drivers to make Mantle seem better.

[Sammael]

 

 

How are you exactly biased if you proved it with a video you can't say no to? They've gone in depth why they prefer Gsync, mainly because of the VRR zone being much better; http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Displays/AMD-FreeSync-First-Impressions-and-Technical-Discussion/Inside-and-Outside-VRR-Wind

 

 

The bias predates that specific article.  It was not generated after analyzing any differences, as the video I linked showed.  Whether their views on the experience hold up to scrutiny by others remains to be seen.  It may be a benefit of gsync below the vrr range, if your gpu is not powerful enough to at least hit 30-40 fps and you refuse to adjust settings, but I do not believe they are neutral arbiters of gsync/freesync comparisons, they are too stuck up inside nvidias #$%^^ as shown from comments in the past.   When other people describe similar issues, it will carry more weight.  This is not a difficult concept, it's like a republican decrying government related healthcare and comparing it to systems that have no involvement.  The perspectives they are coming from are relevant, and they vastly prefer nvidia.

[mr moose]

So why is the 960 so dominant?  They have, More, FANBOYS.  This is so obvious to the point where I feel silly having to defend this point.

 

Just stop.

 

Your post is so far from the point,  all you are doing is making crap excuses to justify your seriously deluded view of reality.

[Sidiox]

You have a source? And not a bad one (PcPer). Also that means the fault lies in display manufactures and not FreeSync or AMD. I'd also like to hear input based on a technology designed to only stop tearing being the blame for something that has been happening (especially with high refresh rate displays) for years now. How come the Swift also has bad ghosting? G-Sync is the blame? It's easy for anyone to fabricate rumors.

I agree alot with you, PcPer is horrible ofc. WCCF tech would be much better

 

/joke

[C3DMaX]

i tried this driver but had to revert back to omega because i head freezes after about 10 minutes of playing any game. (r9 280x)

[Faa]

The bias predates that specific article.  It was not generated after analyzing any differences, as the video I linked showed.  Whether their views on the experience hold up to scrutiny by others remains to be seen.  It may be a benefit of gsync below the vrr range, if your gpu is not powerful enough to at least hit 30-40 fps and you refuse to adjust settings, but I do not believe they are neutral arbiters of gsync/freesync comparisons, they are too stuck up inside nvidias #$%^^ as shown from comments in the past.   When other people describe similar issues, it will carry more weight.  This is not a difficult concept, it's like a republican decrying government related healthcare and comparing it to systems that have no involvement.  The perspectives they are coming from are relevant, and they vastly prefer nvidia.

Haha, coming from Freesync all the way to republican governments lol. Sorry dude you're the one who's crying which just tells you're the biased one. 

 

 

I agree alot with you, PcPer is horrible ofc. WCCF tech would be much better

 

/joke

Says the guy who got scammed (8320 owner).

[thebennyboy]

 

Says the guy who got scammed (8320 owner).

 

 

Not stopped lecturing people about their CPU's? You should have been banned a long time ago. You're an idiot.

[Opcode]

Not stopped lecturing people about their CPU's? You should have been banned a long time ago. You're an idiot.

Agree. It's pointless to justify an argument based on what CPU you own.

[Bloodkil933]

Agree.

 

Just FYI, the mods just banned him for 7 days for that, then decided to remove it...

[Dabombinable]

Just FYI, the mods just banned him for 7 days for that...

Who again?