AMD Freesync Monitors & Reviews Thread

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

wand3r3r

Diamond Member
May 16, 2008
3,180
0
0
It took a while to get here, but if the proof is in the eating of the pudding, FreeSync tastes just as good as G-SYNC when it comes to adaptive refresh rates. Perhaps more importantly, while you’re not getting a “free” monitor upgrade, the current prices of the FreeSync displays are very close to what you’d pay for an equivalent display that doesn’t have adaptive sync. That’s great news, and with the major scaler manufacturers on board with adaptive sync the price disparity should only shrink over time.

The short summary is that FreeSync works just as you’d expect, and at least in our limited testing so far there have been no problems. Which isn’t to say that FreeSync will work with every possible AMD setup right now. As noted last month, the initial FreeSync driver that AMD provided (Catalyst 15.3 Beta 1) only allows FreeSync to work with single GPU configurations. Another driver should be coming next month that will support FreeSync with CrossFire setups.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9097/the-amd-freesync-review

The two graphs above show how frame rates are affected when enabling / disabling V-Sync. With V-Sync enabled (red line) on a display that has a refresh rate of 60Hz, and the games configured for high image quality settings to target the 40-60 FPS range, it is not uncommon to see frame rates bounce between 60 and 30 FPS for a time (half the monitor's refresh rate), which means many frames are duplicated, which introduces lag. We should mention that this is another area where FreeSync has an advantage over G-SYNC. With FreeSync, if V-Sync is disabled, frame rates are not limited by the max refresh rate of the connected display.
http://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-freesync-and-lg-34um67-widescreen-monitor-review

Along with this information, AMD also gave some performance data. It has long been a question of whether FreeSync will have any performance impact, and to answer this AMD has done some tests of its own. On identical platforms using a Z87 motherboard and an i7-4770K processor, AMD said that enabling FreeSync actually improved performance by about 0.2 percent when using an R9 290X. When using a GTX 780, AMD actually observed that its competitor's technology, G-Sync, reduced performance by about 1.5 percent.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-project-freesync-launch,28759.html

Hands-on with AMD's FreeSync: The technology that could kill Nvidia's G-Sync

If there's one thing tech market doesn't need, it's another standards cat fight. But you survived Firewire vs. USB, HD-DVD vs. Blu-ray, and RDRAM vs. DDR so get ready for the battle between Nvidia's G-Sync and AMD's FreeSync to kick into high gear.

...

But back to the consumer who will be forced to choose between the two when buying a monitor. If the 11 monitors that support FreeSync actually all appear, it would mean AMD has an advantage in support. Even almost a year and a half after announcing G-Sync, the number of current G-Sync panels is six according to Nvidia's own page. If AMD is right, and we see 20 FreeSync panels by the end of this year, that's a strength in numbers G-Sync has never enjoyed.

Nvidia's strength, on the other hand, is the popularity of its GPUs. Most hardware surveys give Nvidia roughly a 2:1 advantage in discrete graphics market share, which means there's a higher chance of a gamer buying a G-Sync monitor to match his or her Nvidia GPU.

To balance that out, monitor's using FreeSync appear to have a price advantage:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2897...echnology-that-could-kill-nvidias-g-sync.html

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/monitors/2015/03/19/amd-freesync-officially-launches/1
The LG 34UM67 has an MSRP of $649 while its little brother, the 29UM67, can be purchased for $449. Compared to other ultrawide monitors the new LG FreeSync display holds no additional price premium. In fact, the monitor is cheaper than the equivalently spec'd LG 34UM65 which lacks FreeSync support. Such aggressive pricing bodes well for the competitiveness of FreeSync displays in the marketplace.
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/monitors/81694-lg-34um67-amd-freesync-monitor/

http://techreport.com/news/27987/amd-makes-freesync-official-reveals-display-pricing

Where are the 4k freesync displays, I know samsung has some coming soon anyway. That's my main interest atm.
 

S.H.O.D.A.N.

Senior member
Mar 22, 2014
205
0
41
If you can keep your fps high you don't need freesync in the first place.

Playing Shadow of Mordor yesterday, I could easily go from 90+ to sub 60 frames in one turn of the camera. I'd say even at higher frame rates the tech has good applications.
 

kasakka

Senior member
Mar 16, 2013
334
1
81
Hopefully nvidia smartens up and supports this. The current list of gsync monitors is sparse and they all use garbage panels. Providing support to adaptive sync, which we know works with nvidia as seen on the leaked driver that allowed gsync to work without the module , will really open up the selection of screens you can go with.

Right now it's the crappy swift and a couple other terrible TN screens in gsync land and that is it.

There's already an IPS panel from Acer with G-Sync on the market and it seems to trade blows with the Swift. Have you even seen the Swift? It looks great and has little to do with the old 6-bit TN panels that gave the technology its bad name.

The reason why somebody got G-Sync working on a laptop was that the laptop has an eDP panel and that is apparently controlled directly by the GPU rather than having a scaler in between. So it's not quite the same as a regular display.

Freesync and G-Sync are pretty much the same, just with a different implementation (Freesync components probably only do the adaptive sync part and G-Sync is essentially a replacement for the display scaler). AMD made a smart move by passing the manufacturing to display manufacturers rather than selling their own component.

What has not been mentioned in the articles is whether Freesync works in windowed mode, on the desktop etc. G-Sync might do that on Windows 10 apparently but currently you need fullscreen mode for it to work on Win7/8. I would love to have it working in borderless window mode as that is what many emulators use nowadays.

Nvidia also has some issues with G-Sync when combined with SLI: DSR and MFAA are not available in that case. It's been quite a while and I really hope they fix it in drivers eventually. The current situation where just having a G-Sync display connected means no DSR with SLI is just plain stupid - they should at least let us choose a non-G-Sync mode and use it with a G-Sync display.
 

bunnyfubbles

Lifer
Sep 3, 2001
12,248
3
0
Haha, you're always so touchy about this screen. I remember another thread where you were up in arms over remarks on its poor quality. It's just a bad TN like they all are.

Fortunately we have freesync and IPS options. I would guess the same screens should find their way into a few gsync panels as well. No reason they won't work with gsync as we've learned that gsync doesn't even require the module to function and was just a way to squeeze a couple hundred out of everyone who bought a gsync screen.

I'm only "touchy" because of how obtuse you are. From what you've been spewing its like saying supercars shouldn't exist because you don't go over go over the speed limit and thus would rather have a truck or luxury sedan which would be better for work/comfort. The problem is that there are already plenty of slow monitors with great static image quality for people like you, and its as if you'd rather there not exist any option for those of us who like motion quality.

And until we see the Acer XB270HU, the best we've had is the Eizo Foris FG2421, a 1080p VA panel for $600...which was still a lot slower than the Swift...

Are TN panels "crap"? Relative to IPS for viewing angles they certainly are, but when it comes to motion clairty IPS have historically been just as "crap", and it won't be until the XB270HU that we finally (hopefully, TFTCentral seems sold, so that's great news) get the best of everything.
 
Last edited:

Grooveriding

Diamond Member
Dec 25, 2008
9,108
1,260
126
I'm only "touchy" because of how obtuse you are. From what you've been spewing its like saying supercars shouldn't exist because you don't go over go over the speed limit and thus would rather have a truck or luxury sedan which would be better for work/comfort. The problem is that there are already plenty of slow monitors with great static image quality for people like you, and its as if you'd rather there not exist any option for those of us who like motion quality.

And until we see the Acer XB270HU, the best we've had is the Eizo Foris FG2421, a 1080p VA panel for $600...which was still a lot slower than the Swift...

Are TN panels "crap"? Relative to IPS for viewing angles they certainly are, but when it comes to motion clairty IPS have historically been just as "crap", and it won't be until the XB270HU that we finally (hopefully, TFTCentral seems sold, so that's great news) get the best of everything.

Let's not ruin a thread with what I'm sure will be pages of the same championing of TN I remember you delivering before. If you didn't like my initial comment of the swift being crap, which I think it is, there was no need to jump in - again - with the same narrative. Spare everyone the broken car analogies and stay on topic for the good of the thread.

No one anywhere has been saying there is no place for cheap TN screens, just sharing their opinions on them. You're welcome to yours and no one is going to take it or whatever accomplishments you've achieved with your swift away from you.
 

S.H.O.D.A.N.

Senior member
Mar 22, 2014
205
0
41
I'd really appreciate if the reviewers could consistently specify the minium refresh rate for functional Freesync on the reviewed hardware. It's a chore to try and find that info on the net in many cases.
 

96Firebird

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 2010
5,712
316
126
I'd really appreciate if the reviewers could consistently specify the minium refresh rate for functional Freesync on the reviewed hardware. It's a chore to try and find that info on the net in many cases.

I agree, I was reading one review and couldn't even find the minimum refresh rate for the monitor... I guess it was 40Hz, but they had benchmarks for games that were averaging less than that?

Interesting development about the ghosting, I wonder if the "right" components are more expensive? Wonder if the cost-cutters thought it wouldn't get noticed?

Edit - Oh, wait, I found the review I mentioned above. The specs were in a marketing slide (I skip over those).
 

sontin

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2011
3,273
149
106
From the wording it seems a parts selection, not FreeSync. I'm wondering if nvidia had stricter regulations on what the manufacturers could include with a gsync labeled monitor. Curious to see more reviews.

nVidia is working very closely with every partner to optimize the displays.

Hardware.fr has the Acer display and they came to the same conclusion about the ghosting:
Google Translation:
FreeSync once activated, the flow advances, without increasing latency. This is as good as G-Sync ... at least if the performance level is between 120-144 fps. Below, the Acer screen quickly shows its limits.

A smaller level of performance, such as 60 fps, a very pronounced ghosting phenomenon appears. The ghosting is a natural phenomenon for LCD screens, but various techniques, such as overdrive, so are in principle to eliminate or at least reduce the maximum.

But for XG270HU or disables Acer simply overdrive when the LIF is used (3 options are proposed and make no real difference) or the overdrive was calibrated only for operation at 144 Hz and operating parameters not adapted to the lower refresh rates. But ultimately, the problem is that on this screen and realistic level of performance for most players, FreeSync adds a compromise over for the players: you must choose between flow and no ghosting.

And unfortunately that's not the only problem we encountered. In many games, when we aim +/- 60 fps, it is common to have short passages at 40 fps, or under the lower limit of the LIF range supported by this display. In this case, significant jerks impacting fluidity. It's a little better when the V-Sync is disabled, but it is very troublesome.

We tested several G-Sync screens and no problems of this kind has never been met. Nvidia uses its G-Sync module for applying an overdrive suitable for LIF and avoids rather well the phenomenon of ghosting.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1546989/...-that-could-kill-nvidias-g-sync#post_23687732

So it is not enough to just change the scaler.

/edit: And all of the these displays are Freesync displays. So AMD knew that all of them will ship with ghosting.
 
Last edited:

Rvenger

Elite Member <br> Super Moderator <br> Video Cards
Apr 6, 2004
6,283
5
81
If I see anymore personal attacks - I am going to start throwing the offenders out one by one with a red card.

You know who you are.


-Rvenger
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
nVidia is working very closely with every partner to optimize the displays.

Hardware.fr has the Acer display and they came to the same conclusion about the ghosting:
Google Translation:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1546989/...-that-could-kill-nvidias-g-sync#post_23687732

So it is not enough to just change the scaler.

/edit: And all of the these displays are Freesync displays. So AMD knew that all of them will ship with ghosting.

This is really a shame, because it will already raise questions about the tech from day one, while the real issue is elsewhere (Monitor manufactors cost focus.). Ghosting, 40-48FPS minimums etc. They should have set demands for requirements to ship as Freesync monitors to keep the standard as expected.
 

Subyman

Moderator <br> VC&G Forum
Mar 18, 2005
7,876
32
86
This is really a shame, because it will already raise questions about the tech from day one, while the real issue is elsewhere (Monitor manufactors cost focus.). Ghosting, 40-48FPS minimums etc. They should have set demands for requirements to ship as Freesync monitors to keep the standard as expected.

I agree in principle so that freesync gets shown in the best light, but if this is really a tech that people want to see ubiquitously in the monitor market then it can't have stipulations tied to it. I guess that is one good thing about something be proprietary and strictly regulated, the experience and standards can be controlled. With freesync being completely open, YMMV.
 

Noctifer616

Senior member
Nov 5, 2013
380
0
76
This is really a shame, because it will already raise questions about the tech from day one, while the real issue is elsewhere (Monitor manufactors cost focus.). Ghosting, 40-48FPS minimums etc. They should have set demands for requirements to ship as Freesync monitors to keep the standard as expected.

They can't control that, even if AMD wouldn't brand low quality monitors freesync, they could still be branded variable refresh rate. Not much AMD could do since it's open.
 

bunnyfubbles

Lifer
Sep 3, 2001
12,248
3
0
Let's not ruin a thread with what I'm sure will be pages of the same championing of TN I remember you delivering before.
not championing, defending against your disinformation. Maybe you don't realize it, but you almost always come across as suggesting that TN is garbage for everyone regardless of circumstance, when the reality is that its long been the best/only option for motion clarity.

If you didn't like my initial comment of the swift being crap, which I think it is, there was no need to jump in - again - with the same narrative.
it wasn't just your comment on the swift, but on fast monitors (i.e. TN) in general. I get it, you don't like them, you'd rather have IPS at all costs, and have no problem sacrificing speed for it.

Spare everyone the broken car analogies and stay on topic for the good of the thread.
maybe don't crap in it in the first place? Most of these FreeSync monitors (the ones that do more than 75Hz) are TN panels, although if they don't have a strobing option they're not going to be exceptional for motion clarity anyway...

No one anywhere has been saying there is no place for cheap TN screens, just sharing their opinions on them. You're welcome to yours and no one is going to take it or whatever accomplishments you've achieved with your swift away from you.
I don't have a Swift, not that I would turn one down. I've been holding out for big Maxwell, as my GTX780 can barely suffice for 1080p120, let alone 1440p120+, although maybe 85 or 100 would suffice. At any rate I'm glad I held off because the first IPS capable of truly exceptional motion clarity is going to be coming out soon, and likely others to follow, although it is a G-Sync monitor...:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/acer_xb270hu.htm

without strobe and with strobe (something to look out for with FreeSync):


BenQ has their own strobing tech outside of nVidia, but so far they've only been doing TN, including their 1440p144 FreeSync
 
Last edited:

sontin

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2011
3,273
149
106
This is really a shame, because it will already raise questions about the tech from day one, while the real issue is elsewhere (Monitor manufactors cost focus.). Ghosting, 40-48FPS minimums etc. They should have set demands for requirements to ship as Freesync monitors to keep the standard as expected.

I dont see why this is the fault of the monitor manufacture. Neither the Adaptive-Sync spec nor AMD with Freesync forces them to use certain specification for the implementation. They only need to put a new scaler in the monitor and update their EEID information.

So it would be up to AMD to enforce a certain level of quality for their Freesync brand.
 
Last edited:

Stormflux

Member
Jul 21, 2010
140
26
91
What could be done for marketing purposes (if when proprietary GSync is killed), is to have a FreeSync and GSync Certification. Monitors must meet certain specs, (G2G response, latency, etc) and get promoted as such. Anyone can use AdaptiveSync but for branding and marketing, suggesting certain monitors makes it easier for the masses who don't read TFTCentral, or other review sites.
 

Vesku

Diamond Member
Aug 25, 2005
3,743
28
86
I think this is just where customers need to be discerning and if shopping for a FreeSync or in the future a generic AdaptiveSync monitor hold out for one with good consistent overdrive in it's whole stated variable Hz range. Or decide they are OK with how it is for the price. It's not as if monitors people have been buying this whole time are completely ghost/motion blur free. Here is the non-FreeSync version of the BenQ reviewed on motion performance.:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/content/benq_xl2720z.htm#display_comparisons

There is obviously some purchaser tolerance for this particular characteristic.
 

NTMBK

Lifer
Nov 14, 2011
10,269
5,134
136
Wait, so it wasn't vaporware? But VC&G assured me it would never come out! :O
 

Vesku

Diamond Member
Aug 25, 2005
3,743
28
86
I would like to see reviewers thoroughly test the motion blur, ghosting to see if FreeSync on performs differently than FreeSync off. Including manual changes of overdrive settings and the like as found in TFTCentral reviews. Best to verify FreeSync is using the full correction features as the monitor is set to in normal mode.
 

QuantumPion

Diamond Member
Jun 27, 2005
6,010
1
76
Is there anything preventing Nvidia cards from supporting freesync monitors other than drivers? If not, I'd assume they would add support to freesync so as not to lose out potential sales to freesync monitor owners. And if freesync is just as good as g-sync but without requiring an extra module, g-sync will just fade away and freesync will be the standard. Everyone wins, yay.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
Is there anything preventing Nvidia cards from supporting freesync monitors other than drivers? If not, I'd assume they would add support to freesync so as not to lose out potential sales to freesync monitor owners. And if freesync is just as good as g-sync but without requiring an extra module, g-sync will just fade away and freesync will be the standard. Everyone wins, yay.

Hardware. Same reason AMD only got a limited set of cards/APUs to support it.
 

Grooveriding

Diamond Member
Dec 25, 2008
9,108
1,260
126
ridding the world of ignorance is a good thing

Refer back to whatever thread it was where you went off on this before and you can refresh yourself on the relevant rebuttals on the subjective values of different metrics. Perhaps necro the thread if you need to, but your re-education won't be happening in this one.
 
Last edited:

QuantumPion

Diamond Member
Jun 27, 2005
6,010
1
76
Hardware. Same reason AMD only got a limited set of cards/APUs to support it.

Oh. Well is there anything preventing nvidia's next card or even current card manufacturers from producing cards which support freesync/async? If so, same result, just slightly delayed.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
Oh. Well is there anything preventing nvidia's next card or even current card manufacturers from producing cards which support freesync/async? If so, same result, just slightly delayed.

Needs to be DP1.2a/1.3 compliant.

For Intel that means Cannonlake(Late 2016) or later. For nVidia it looks like Pascal(2016?).

The currect hardware support list:
 
Last edited:
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |