And it can be far better if the pipeline won't do two tone mapping.Yes, extremely good actullay.
Making better panels is another problem, but in the software side we can't do anything. We have to wait for some better monitors. But for the tone mapping solutions we can manage to get better latency and better image quality.hmm, that doesn't sound like a huge IQ difference to begin with. Most problems in the HDR implementation will be the maximum nits reachable by the panel (is it 1000nits or less?) and the color space as well as contrast. Whether it can maintain decent black (OLED, Full Array Backlight, QLED .. etc) or not. So your limitations are mostly hardware, not software.
The HDR specification is doesn't really matter. AMD support both HDR10 and Dolby Vision. But sure it can't be used in FreeSync 2 mode, so the display has to support another HDR specification to bring up a solution for the duplicated tone mapping. On the other hand, a FreeSync 2 display can support HDR10 or Dolby Vision also.Again as I said, GSync and consoles work through the HDR10 standards. They don't do it through extra APIs or libraries.
FreeSync proposes to bypass the HDR10 standard achieving a claimed lower latency. But it needs special coding and attention to achieve that, it's not automatic. To quote Tom's hardware on this:
" The question of why not simply use the HDR10 or Dolby Vision transport spaces is already answered, then—they’d require another tone mapping step. David Glen, senior fellow architect at AMD, said that HDR10 and Dolby Vision were designed for 10 or more years of growth. Therefore, even the best HDR displays available today fall well short of what those transport spaces allow. That’s why the display normally has to tone map again, adding the extra input lag FreeSync 2 looks to squeeze out.
Sounds like a lot of work, right? Every FreeSync 2-compatible monitor needs to be characterized, to start. Then, on the software side, games and video players must be enabled through an API provided by AMD. There’s a lot of coordination that needs to happen between game developers, AMD, and display vendors, so it remains to be seen how enthusiastically AMD’s partners embrace FreeSync 2, particularly because the technology is going to be proprietary for now. "
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-freesync-2-hdr-lfc,33248.html
The main problem is, that both HDR10 and Dolby Vision designed for the videos. You don't care about the tone mapping inside the displays in this scenario, because the production pipeline is very standardized, so the end result won't be that bad. In a game this is not the same. The production pipeline is very different from games to games, so there is no real option to get good result on the displays. The idea of FreeSync 2 is to cut out the tone mapping inside the monitors, and in this case the devs can create correct images, and this implementation will also solve the latency problem. It's a proprietary technique for sure, but Xbox One S/X will also support it.
It doesn't really that hard.