This is a lot of very interesting discussion. There's one inconsistency I keep seeing though. AMD is getting praised for trying to have an open standard, which it should, and Nvidia is being shunned for having a proprietary one. Yet Mantle is being praised left right and center, while Nvidia's work with Open GL is being ignored. Largely in fact by the same people.
Reguardless, I believe there will be an open standard available sometime in 2015. I doubt any GPU manufacturer will have anything to do with it, and it's probably the monitor manufacturers doing it for added features. Gsync will probably exist for a few years, eventually turning into an added extra that monitors can tack on for another feature point.
I myself got turned off when I heard that G-sync and lightboost will not be usable at the same time. I'm going to be buying a ROG anyways, so I will at least have the option to toggle them depending on the game.
Which is one reason why I say it doesn't exist. How can it, if the DP 1.3 spec isn't finished?
This is putting aside the major technical challenges with the hardware modifications required, which AMD is just hoping that people might do, somehow, by advocating for DP 1.3
Whereas Nvidia engineers are doing the gruntwork of getting it to actually be in things we can buy. There's NO comparison.
That was simply hypothesizing on the AMD reps part. He was asked why nVidia uses additional hardware, if none is needed and he said that he didn't know, unless their hardware didn't support the eDP standard (paraphrased).
I don't really know where you're pulling that hardware mantra
From a follow-up interview an AMD rep gave after people pressed for more details on FreeSync. He said, directly, that it would require a compatible controller in the display.
To be clear, just because a monitor would run with DisplayPort 1.3 doesn't guarantee this feature would work. It also requires the controller on the display to understand and be compatible with the variable refresh portions of the spec, which with eDP 1.0 at least, isn't required. AMD is hoping that with the awareness they are building with stories like this display designers will actually increase the speed of DP 1.3 adoption and include support for variable refresh rate with them. That would mean an ecosystem of monitors that could potentially support variable speed refresh on both AMD and NVIDIA cards. All that would be needed on the PC side is a software update for both Radeon and GeForce graphics cards.
However, Petersen quickly pointed out an important detail about AMD's "free sync" demo: it was conducted on laptop systems. Laptops, he explained, have a different display architecture than desktops, with a more direct interface between the GPU and the LCD panel, generally based on standards like LVDS or eDP (embedded DisplayPort). Desktop monitors use other interfaces, like HDMI and DisplayPort, and typically have a scaler chip situated in the path between the GPU and the panel. As a result, a feature like variable refresh is nearly impossible to implement on a desktop monitor as things now stand.
That, Petersen explained, is why Nvidia decided to create its G-Sync module, which replaces the scaler ASIC with logic of Nvidia's own creation. To his knowledge, no scaler ASIC with variable refresh capability exists—and if it did, he said, "we would know." Nvidia's intent in building the G-Sync module was to enable this capability and thus to nudge the industry in the right direction.
When asked about a potential VESA standard to enable dynamic refresh rates, Petersen had something very interesting to say: he doesn't think it's necessary, because DisplayPort already supports "everything required" for dynamic refresh rates via the extension of the vblank interval. That's why, he noted, G-Sync works with existing cables without the need for any new standards. Nvidia sees no need and has no plans to approach VESA about a new standard for G-Sync-style functionality—because it already exists.
I know you told me that, it's also irrelevant. This is not an eDP/DP issue, this is a "the thing that controls how the LCD panel refreshes" issue, as has been confirmed by both Nvidia and AMD, and tech reporters investigating it.
And several people already pointed out there's plenty of korean monitors without a built-in scaler, they even come without any OSD. So the Nv rep excuse is weak at best.
' no scaler ASIC with variable refresh capability existsand if it did, he said, "we would know." '
So, you've been presented with information from both AMD and Nvidia, and from a display manufacturer, all of which say the same thing in that it requires new display hardware, and you still cling to your notion of it really being just a simple software fix?
The only difference is that AMD thinks it's a simple addition to hardware, whereas the display manufacturers themselves understand and accept that it isn't.
' no scaler ASIC with variable refresh capability existsand if it did, he said, "we would know." '
Just because a panel uses eDP, does not make it Freesync compatible. There is a scaler requirement too.
They found a laptop that supported it with both the variable scaler, and eDP. Both are required. Both spec's exist, but it is rare that both are available at the same time.The solution is already done and showcased in a retail product! You can hack your way from a DP source to an eDP display too. Is that hard to follow the points?
And as already said the scaler ain't needed at all as there's plenty of desktop monitors without them.
Not only that, display makers should be greatly pleased as a PS4, Wii-U and Xbone update should enable it for them too. i.e not only a small portion of the market and pretty much everyone.
To be clear, just because a monitor would run with DisplayPort 1.3 doesn't guarantee this feature would work. It also requires the controller on the display to understand and be compatible with the variable refresh portions of the spec, which with eDP 1.0 at least, isn't required. AMD is hoping that with the awareness they are building with stories like this display designers will actually increase the speed of DP 1.3 adoption and include support for variable refresh rate with them. That would mean an ecosystem of monitors that could potentially support variable speed refresh on both AMD and NVIDIA cards. All that would be needed on the PC side is a software update for both Radeon and GeForce graphics cards.
They found a laptop that supported it with both the variable scaler, and eDP. Both are required. Both spec's exist, but it is rare that both are available at the same time.
That may change.
EDIT:
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...h-FreeSync-Could-Be-Alternative-NVIDIA-G-Sync
I'm not getting you at all. The thing is done and showcased in a dirt cheap convertible. That means that there are no such things as superexpensive development and electronics that will make FreeSync not viable.
You have no idea how expensive it will be. I never said how expensive it will be. I said that it requires both a variable scaler and eDP for it to work with existing hardware, and it'll take a variable scaler and DP 1.3 before it works on desktop monitors.I'm not getting you at all. The thing is done and showcased in a dirt cheap convertible. That means that there are no such things as superexpensive development and electronics that will make FreeSync not viable. In fact it is all over the place in the mobile realm.
Making your displays 1.3 DP and VBLANK capable would broad your target consumers to everyone instead of just Nvidia cards.
Display manufacturers say otherwise, and I'm inclined to believe them more than I believe you.
You have no idea how expensive it will be. I never said how expensive it will be. I said that it requires both a variable scaler and eDP for it to work with existing hardware, and it'll take a variable scaler and DP 1.3 before it works on desktop monitors.
I wasn't arguing with you and monitors doesn't need a scaler at all.
If you haven't noticed already controller != scaler.
The controller also needs to understand variable refresh rates, which was clearly mentioned that eDP does not require such abilities.
All we can do is go off of what they said. Just because you don't understand why, does not make it not true.That can be done in the GPU? Serious? What kind of witchcraft is this?
Freesync will likely result in some extra costs as well, though probably less, but it also does less.
How are you estimating this?All that is needed is to update the current panels controlers
and from my estimation it would cost about nothing, less than
one $ for the screen , far less than the amount Nvidia is trying
to extract by porting an eDP standard to DT screens..