As mentioned by every g-sync article, it takes special hardware in the monitor for this to work and as the quote from Overlord mentions, it requires a lot of R&D to get it to work for each specific monitor. It is not a simple Displayport change. The Displayport portion of things is the easy part.That's what has surprised me too, especially since the GPU makers have a decent amount of influence with DisplayPort. I think that will be the alternative to G-Sync, IO capabilities built into the display connector standards. Could do this already with the integrated ethernet HDMI or Thunderbolt just need some of those ARM chips to find their way from Smart TV to Computer Displays.
It is definitely exciting that there is something new in the display world that will be within reach to the masses long before 4k.
A better gaming experience, as the overwhelmingly positive reviews describe, is something that resonates with people.
3 x 30" 120Hz 3D G-Sync IPS 4K bezeless monitors? Yes please. That or the same thing but all on one curved panel.
I think the people who aren't happy about it are those that it serves no purpose. Those who want high quality/high resolution screens and those who don't want to be locked exclusively to nVidia, or don't want nVidia at all, to use it. People who don't mind those limitations are all for it.
No point in calling people fanboys because they want 1600 or 4K IPS monitors and won't do 1080p TN panels instead.
Start a petition for AMD to have better R&D or negotiate a licensing deal with NVIDIA. I'm sure if the price is right they'll do it.
Why are you telling me that? I haven't said I want it on AMD.
I think the people who aren't happy about it are those that it serves no purpose. Those who want high quality/high resolution screens and those who don't want to be locked exclusively to nVidia, or don't want nVidia at all, to use it. People who don't mind those limitations are all for it.
No point in calling people fanboys because they want 1600 or 4K IPS monitors and won't do 1080p TN panels instead.
So what do you have to say about the tech? I find it really straight forward in what it does, although I'm sure the actual details of how it's accomplished are fairly intricate. That controller board is surprisingly complex.It would be nice to actually discuss the technology and what it brings to the table rather than constantly complaining about how it's not available for AMD graphics card owners.
I was responding to what you said but speaking in general about people who constantly bring in the "locked in" argument and how it should be an open standard. This has been an ongoing complaint ad nauseum since G-sync was first introduced. It would be nice to actually discuss the technology and what it brings to the table rather than constantly complaining about how it's not available for AMD graphics card owners.
Even Groove, who uses nVidia, got grief because he wants hires/IPS. He doesn't want to step backwards in IQ for what GSync offers.
It's not simply those who want it to be available on AMD cards.
Even Groove, who uses nVidia, got grief because he wants hires/IPS. He doesn't want to step backwards in IQ for what GSync offers.
Has there been any discussions that preclude it from IPS or higher resolution panels? I haven't seen such a statement from NVIDIA. In fact, I've read the contrary from places like Overlord. The technology is in it's infancy, in time I'm sure NVIDIA will push it out to all types of displays. A popular TN panel is a very good start since this technology caters primarily to gamers.
One thing I would like to see is g-sync + low persistence working in tandem, that is pretty much the holy grail.
I think the people who aren't happy about it are those that it serves no purpose. Those who want high quality/high resolution screens and those who don't want to be locked exclusively to nVidia, or don't want nVidia at all, to use it. People who don't mind those limitations are all for it.
No point in calling people fanboys because they want 1600 or 4K IPS monitors and won't do 1080p TN panels instead.
Start a petition for AMD to have better R&D or negotiate a licensing deal with NVIDIA. I'm sure if the price is right they'll do it. Because other than that, nothing in life is free and this has been discussed so many times that at this point, we get it but complaining about it in every g-sync thread won't change anything.
^
Nobody ever said what they're saying about 1600p IPS, not even 4k received this kind of response.
They are apples to oranges so I don't see the point of your statement, maybe I missed it completely.
I do find it interesting that all the review/first impressions coming from the sites with these monitors in person tell us they will never go back to their IPS monitors to game again after using it (the ones I've seen at least). Then you see so many people here saying that it is useless if it is not on an IPS panel. I can only assume it is as everyone one who has seen it in person has said, you have to see it to understand. I can only take their word for it.
That said, Asus does make IPS panels as well, who is to say we have to wait long for IPS G-sync monitors? We only know about one monitor that they have. We do not know about other possible models.
I do want a G-sync monitor, but I will likely wait a few months to see what is being offered before I jump on board. I'm currently leaning towards a VG278H model, if one is made.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAzRHVXaaV0#t=53
You're telling me you can't see the difference between 60 fps v-sync and g-sync in that video?
As mentioned by every g-sync article, it takes special hardware in the monitor for this to work and as the quote from Overlord mentions, it requires a lot of R&D to get it to work for each specific monitor. It is not a simple Displayport change. The Displayport portion of things is the easy part.