Petition: Nvidia should support VESA Adaptive-Sync / FreeSync

[tential]

I have thought about this too. It is very possible that Nvidia forbids it. Or it is is technically impossible. Depends on how paranoid one is to which they guess.

Unlike desktop monitors, notebook displays won’t require that proprietary G-Sync module, but to ensure quality, Nvidia is pretty stingy with its approval process. For example, all of the current G-Sync-enabled laptop displays top out at 75Hz, not the standard 60Hz. As for supported mobile GPUs, right now it’s just the 965M, 970M, and 980M. Nvidia is dedicated to the G-Sync cause, so expect to see a proliferation of G-Sync gaming notebooks in the near future.

Nvidia tests your monitor, they do QC, they ensure that every single Gsync monitor out is up to their standards. There are multiple videos on this, and it was massively covered during Gsync's launch.

Obviously it's good for Nvidia and the customer to ensure that every monitor works the way it's supposed to. AMD's plan is to let monitors compete against each other. Nvidia wants to ensure that they get as little bad press as possible and ensure their monitors with their branding on it are top quality. Nvidia is not going to be associated with a less than premium product.

 

[Dribble]

If the freesync group or nvidia or AMD introduced a *freesync done well* badge of quality called whatever you like you can bet within a year they would be the only freesync displays for sale because no one would buy one without that sticker.
It might increase prices slightly as there would be no half baked implementations and someone would have to pay for the conformance testing but it would help the freesync market no end as when you bought a *freesync done well* monitor you'd know that the freesync experience would live up to your expectations. This is opposed to the situation today where you have understand all the features it really needs to have then read all the small print, and research the reviews, and check for the latest drivers to see if the monitor you are thinking of buying has them.

Not sure why people have such a problem with this? 100% confident Nvidia would want something like this if they were going to give up on their already higher quality gsync displays.

 

[tential]

If the freesync group or nvidia or AMD introduced a *freesync done well* badge of quality called whatever you like you can bet within a year they would be the only freesync displays for sale because no one would buy one without that sticker.
It might increase prices slightly as there would be no half baked implementations and someone would have to pay for the conformance testing but it would help the freesync market no end as when you bought a *freesync done well* monitor you'd know that the freesync experience would live up to your expectations. This is opposed to the situation today where you have understand all the features it really needs to have then read all the small print, and research the reviews, and check for the latest drivers to see if the monitor you are thinking of buying has them.

Not sure why people have such a problem with this? 100% confident Nvidia would want something like this if they were going to give up on their already higher quality gsync displays.

Done well in comparison to what?
The issue is, you're setting a minimum performance level for people that forces people to get features they don't want.

I don't want/need/want to pay for a high refresh rate monitor. Even 50-60hz freesync for me is ok. Cheapest option that gives me some leeway below 60 hz is all I am looking for.

That's why we have these things called options...

We actually did have a "freesync done well" badge. It's called Gsync, in which you're forced to adhere to Nvidia standards....

Yet we're not all buying Gsync monitors...

Not even Nvidia owners are rushing out to buy Gsync monitors (Despite me posting everywhere that they should. Yes, I've said hundreds of times, BUY a gsync monitor, everyone should be trying to get some form of adaptive sync monitor from either camp).

No one is rushing to make more Gsync monitors, so no apparently the Gsync done well moniker hasn't helped Gsync as much as you'd like it to.

Edit: Even more troubling is your idea would have prevented import models of Freesync monitors like the Wasabi Mango from ever existing. Import Freesync monitors have added even more variety to monitors available and have provided MORE competition driving prices of freesync monitors down even further while giving the consumer even more options.

 

[sirmo]

I can't believe anyone can defend the vendor lockin that is g-sync, unless you either work for nvidia or are a shareholder.

The fact is both of these technologies significantly improve user experience, one is free and multivendor, while other one locks you in Nvidia's cards, and also require an expensive monitor module making your monitor cost more.

FreeSync had ghosting issues early on, but this has largely been fixed. It's a no brainer, I would rather spend $200 extra on a video card than pay that for a monitor with G-sync support.

A [$500 AMD GPU + FreeSync monitor] > [$300 Nvidia GPU + G-sync monitor] any day.

 

[Flapdrol1337]

I don't mind it, intel also doesn't support it yet afaik.

But I'm not going to buy a nvidia card as long as they don't either.

 

[jabroni619]

That's not how it works. The reason you perceive G-sync as higher quality is because the added cost is so high that manufacturers can't justify putting it in lower-end non-gaming branded monitors. Only the expensive gaming segment of the market gets the G-sync treatment.
On the other hand, the added cost of freesync is low enough some manufacturers like Samsung pretty much consider it the new standard for their displays. Of course, a lot of these displays aren't really intended as gaming displays. But why is that a bad thing? Adaptive sync should be in as many monitors as possible. And the curved 1440p 144hz IPS panels get freesync as well of course, this has nothing to do with owing anything to g-sync monitors.

Have you actually compared freesync vs gsync refresh rates? Everything he said was correct.

 

[showb1z]

Have you actually compared freesync vs gsync refresh rates? Everything he said was correct.

Yes and I don't have a clue what you're on about. Why should it not be possible to buy a 48-75hz monitor with freesync if you want to?
Why must we all adhere to the golden standards set by what Nvidia deems worthy of G-sync?

 

[showb1z]

You should know since you mentioned LFC.

Only shame is it requires the 2½x factor.

That's why people on a budget may very easily get bad experiences. Because they may get a monitor with low Freesync intervals and on top of that having a graphics card that isn't going to produce miracles on its own in terms of speed.

And how is that not working according to spec?
Please show an example of a freesync monitor not working to spec.

 

[Headfoot]

FreeSync had ghosting issues early on, but this has largely been fixed. It's a no brainer, I would rather spend $200 extra on a video card than pay that for a monitor with G-sync support.

This is a common and oft repeated mistake that belies the fundamental misunderstanding of the tech.

FreeSync never had ghosting issues. It never has and never will, because FreeSync is a specific feature relating to adaptive sync and that alone. It does not determine the quality of the panel you use, it does not determine the level of pixel overdrive you use, it does not determine the color palette or color space, it literally only handles the 'sync' portion of the equation.

This is why there are varying price points and quality levels. It is a method of transmitting frames between monitor and GPU.

If you think having a high minimum refresh rate is bad, then don't buy one with a high minimum refresh rate. Or overclock the monitors that can. Some of those LG FS monitors can get overclocked from 48 to the low 30s for minimum refresh. If you don't want ghosting, don't buy a unit that ghosts (read reviews) or pick a panel tech that is least likely to ghost (high refresh rate TN, followed by high refresh rate IPS with high refresh rate VA last).

 

[tential]

This is a common and oft repeated mistake that belies the fundamental misunderstanding of the tech.

FreeSync never had ghosting issues. It never has and never will, because FreeSync is a specific feature relating to adaptive sync and that alone. It does not determine the quality of the panel you use, it does not determine the level of pixel overdrive you use, it does not determine the color palette or color space, it literally only handles the 'sync' portion of the equation.

This is why there are varying price points and quality levels. It is a method of transmitting frames between monitor and GPU.

If you think having a high minimum refresh rate is bad, then don't buy one with a high minimum refresh rate. Or overclock the monitors that can. Some of those LG FS monitors can get overclocked from 48 to the low 30s for minimum refresh. If you don't want ghosting, don't buy a unit that ghosts (read reviews) or pick a panel tech that is least likely to ghost (high refresh rate TN, followed by high refresh rate IPS with high refresh rate VA last).

The only gsync monitor I'd remotely want has issues below 40 fps. Gsync isn't some magic word That makes everything perfect....

 

[sirmo]

This is a common and oft repeated mistake that belies the fundamental misunderstanding of the tech.

FreeSync never had ghosting issues. It never has and never will, because FreeSync is a specific feature relating to adaptive sync and that alone. It does not determine the quality of the panel you use, it does not determine the level of pixel overdrive you use, it does not determine the color palette or color space, it literally only handles the 'sync' portion of the equation.

This is why there are varying price points and quality levels. It is a method of transmitting frames between monitor and GPU.

If you think having a high minimum refresh rate is bad, then don't buy one with a high minimum refresh rate. Or overclock the monitors that can. Some of those LG FS monitors can get overclocked from 48 to the low 30s for minimum refresh. If you don't want ghosting, don't buy a unit that ghosts (read reviews) or pick a panel tech that is least likely to ghost (high refresh rate TN, followed by high refresh rate IPS with high refresh rate VA last).

No, ghosting I talk about is related to the FreeSync implementation early on that was resolved with monitor firmware update: https://linustechtips.com/main/topi...date-to-fix-freesync-ghosting-eu-only-so-far/

 

[plopke]

I find it really silly that they don't offer Adaptive sync/Freesync as base and G-SYNC as premium. I could understand it wasn't available on the maxwell generation but to not have it on pascal generation feels meh, for a extra extra premium you can get the finishing touch screen.

Intel has stated they will add support but that was like a year ago, so curious if/when that will happen and if it would change anything for Nvidia.

But at the moment the green team is winning so much in marketing ,they probably won't cave in just yet. Last year I mainly recommended a 970GTX but mentioning any good discount deals from AMD resulted in a reaction they rather just pay for a Nvidia card. I see so many twitch/youtube streams sponsered by Nvidia giving them a free 980 or promising a 1080, people falling for the most silly Nvidia gameworks frameworks,... .

Anyway just wanted to point out Nvidia is King in the hearts and minds of social media and their followers. So they can get away with charging their customers more , gsync/founder editions , I would also do it , nothing wrong with making money of people not looking at alternatives. Polaris might become a super good deal in the <$300 market , but will people actually buy it.

 

[sirmo]

I find it really silly that they don't offer Adaptive sync/Freesync as base and G-SYNC as premium. I could understand it wasn't available on the maxwell generation but to not have it on pascal generation feels meh, for a extra extra premium you can get the finishing touch screen.

Intel has stated they will add support but that was like a year ago, so curious if/when that will happen and if it would change anything for Nvidia.

But at the moment the green team is winning so much in marketing ,they probably won't cave in just yet. Last year I mainly recommended a 970GTX but mentioning any good discount deals from AMD resulted in a reaction they rather just pay for a Nvidia card. I see so many twitch/youtube streams sponsered by Nvidia giving them a free 980 or promising a 1080, people falling for the most silly Nvidia gameworks frameworks,... .

Anyway just wanted to point out Nvidia is King in the hearts and minds of social media and their followers. So they can get away with charging their customers more , gsync/founder editions , I would also do it , nothing wrong with making money of people not looking at alternatives. Polaris might become a super good deal in the <$300 market , but will people actually buy it.

When it comes to the technical crowd (not talking about enthusiasts) I would say it's 2:1 in AMD's favor. Just in general. Especially due to open source AMD has been pushing. And those folks have a lot of influence. Let's also not forget, AMD has been taking Nvidia's market share in the last two quarters and Polaris isn't even out yet.

With future games further favoring AMD cards with Mantle based API's. It will be tough to recommend Nvidia cards even for the most hard core of Nvidia fans.

 

[sm625]

A [$500 AMD GPU + FreeSync monitor] > [$300 Nvidia GPU + G-sync monitor] any day.

This is true as long as AMD has a $500 GPU. I would definitely rather have a R9 Nano and a freesync monitor vs a 970 and a G-sync monitor. But when nvidia has a 1070 and AMD still only has a nano... then what?

 

[Bacon1]

If it was so, this wouldn't be the case:

Ahh but you left off the best part. Not only was that from August 2015 before the better freesync monitors (and LFC) were released, but many people were Nvidia biased already:

Oh and 9 of only 48 knew which was which

Right off the bat, we found it interesting that 10 of 48 respondents believed they knew which system was which. Of those 10, nine were correct, though for a variety of reasons.

Hell the Nvidia system was running lower settings for better FPS and no one noticed:

Right next to them, we had another AMD machine at Ultra settings and an Nvidia box dialed down to the High preset. Again, three respondents picked AMD&#8217;s hardware. Seven went with Nvidia, while two said they were of equal quality. Three participants specifically called out smoothness in Battlefield 4 as something they noticed, and nobody reported lower visual quality, despite the dialed-back quality preset and lack of anti-aliasing on the GeForce-equipped machine. Overall, we'd call those results comparable.

Not to mention they wouldn't pay the difference:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-freesync-versus-nvidia-g-sync-reader-event,4246.html

 

[sirmo]

This is true as long as AMD has a $500 GPU. I would definitely rather have a R9 Nano and a freesync monitor vs a 970 and a G-sync monitor. But when nvidia has a 1070 and AMD still only has a nano... then what?

You are talking about a 3 month period. With the impending flood of the market by the HDR monitors, Vega will be available.

 

[zlejedi]

No, ghosting I talk about is related to the FreeSync implementation early on that was resolved with monitor firmware update: https://linustechtips.com/main/topi...date-to-fix-freesync-ghosting-eu-only-so-far/

Well it was solved for that one monitor. Considering how few and only high end models are tested by reviewers with proper equipment it's hard to say if the problem is totally gone.

And I suspect that actual solution was to slap overdrive to work at middle of frequency range and say it's done which is why we see displays like Eizo with 2 frequency ranges.

 

[sirmo]

Well it was solved for that one monitor. Considering how few and only high end models are tested by reviewers with proper equipment it's hard to say if the problem is totally gone.

And I suspect that actual solution was to slap overdrive to work at middle of frequency range and say it's done which is why we see displays like Eizo with 2 frequency ranges.

Yeah it's been long fixed. That's what I was saying.

 

[Headfoot]

No, ghosting I talk about is related to the FreeSync implementation early on that was resolved with monitor firmware update: https://linustechtips.com/main/topi...date-to-fix-freesync-ghosting-eu-only-so-far/

That only proves my point, FreeSync is the transmission protocol and associated end points. The monitor firmware (e.g. not FreeSync) is what was faulty.

 

[kraatus77]

Ahh but you left off the best part. Not only was that from August 2015 before the better freesync monitors (and LFC) were released, but many people were Nvidia biased already:

Oh and 9 of only 48 knew which was which



Hell the Nvidia system was running lower settings for better FPS and no one noticed:



Not to mention they wouldn't pay the difference:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-freesync-versus-nvidia-g-sync-reader-event,4246.html

+1, selective reading is bad.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Ahh but you left off the best part.

Either you missed the "blind test" part. Or are you telling me people can tell Nvidia and AMD apart in terms of manufactor only in a blind test?

+1, selective reading is bad.

Exactly. Not reading its a blind test tells it all.

 

[Bacon1]

Either you missed the "blind test" part. Or are you telling me people can tell Nvidia and AMD apart in terms of manufactor only in a blind test?



Exactly. Not reading its a blind test tells it all.

You didn't even read my post... why bother replying?

I know it's supposed to be a blind test, except 18% of the people knew which was which... as I pointed out in my post that you didn't bother to read.

The best part though, was the end, when people said they wouldn't pay more, and of those that would, wouldn't pay $100-200 more.

3/48 (6%) would pay $200 or more premium

Considering that 40% of them were Nvidia fanboys, that's pretty terrible.

TLDR? Try actually reading the whole test instead of picking out the one graph that you think makes your point. Also you left off it was from August 2015 and didn't have LFC.

 

[kraatus77]

Either you missed the "blind test" part. Or are you telling me people can tell Nvidia and AMD apart in terms of manufactor only in a blind test?



Exactly. Not reading its a blind test tells it all.

like not even noticing graphics quality difference ? and without LFC ? yep

 

[sirmo]

That only proves my point, FreeSync is the transmission protocol and associated end points. The monitor firmware (e.g. not FreeSync) is what was faulty.

No that's not at all what you were saying. You threw an insult at me belittling my technical knowledge, by saying ghosting could only be a low level display panel problem, and nothing to do with FreeSync.

This is a common and oft repeated mistake that belies the fundamental misunderstanding of the tech.

My rebuttal clearly demonstrated that this was absolutely an issue with an early implementation at the FreeSync layer. And now you're backstroking.

 

[UaVaj]

If you really want Freesync, buy AMD. That will change NVidia's mind a lot faster than a Petition.

now that is sound advice.



this does not apply to a few of us. we simply keep absolute minimum dip above 60fps.