[TechPowerUp article] FreeSync explained in more detail

[3DVagabond]

Which STILL doesn't address the fundamental hardware change required on desktop displays, which AMD has said nothing about a plan to address and has been very hesitant to actually acknowledge (but did do so, when pressed by tech reporters).

AMD doesn't make monitors. They are updating the standard to make "Free-Sync" work on any monitor that adheres to the standard.

Yeah, but that is simply not true. Whether AMD intentionally or unintentionally misled is a question one might ask. As it is very clear that existing standards are not gonna cut it. The link 3D posted is undeniable.



If you continue to say freesync uses existing standards then you are continuing to spread misinformation. Its that simple.

Updating the DisplayPort standard for freesync means that current hardware out today will not work either. So current HW is out of the question too. You will have to buy new HW for freesync. And we dont even have an approval, just a request for the standard to be changed.

Freesync is a ways out. Its not existing standards on existing tech. Nvidia told us it wouldnt work like AMD claimed and now we can all see this. Desktop panels cannot do this in their current state. It is absolutely not as simple as AMD made it sound at CES. The whole point was to downplay Gsync. But as we can already see, there is no way to do this on the desktop in its current form.

AMD said that it might be possible for some monitors to be retrofitted with a firmware update. They would know better since they designed the DP standard. I never said it uses existing standards.

I'm not saying that it will magically work on existing monitors. A monitor will obviously have to be DP1.2a compliant. Thing is, it's not going to be put on individual models at ~$200 extra for the feature and only work with certain nVidia cards. It will work with any DP1.2a compliant set of devices (monitor and graphics card). Surely better than the currently proposed G-Sync.

All I was actually addressing was the fact that AMD is actively pursuing bringing Free-Sync to market. Unlike what some would have us believe. As far as the likelihood of acceptance goes, come on, what's the likelihood that it won't be? DP is AMD's standard that they gave to the industry. Why would VESA not make the changes?

 

[Mand]

AMD doesn't make monitors. They are updating the standard to make "Free-Sync" work on any monitor that adheres to the standard.

Which is the great deception, the idea that just because a DP spec update happens (whether 1.2a or 1.3) that display manufacturers will magically develop the new hardware controllers that BOTH Nvidia and AMD agree are going to be required to make variable refresh work.

And then give away that new hardware for free, without a price premium over current monitors. Yeah, sure.

 

[3DVagabond]

Which is the great deception, the idea that just because a DP spec update happens (whether 1.2a or 1.3) that display manufacturers will magically develop the new hardware controllers that BOTH Nvidia and AMD agree are going to be required to make variable refresh work.

And then give away that new hardware for free, without a price premium over current monitors. Yeah, sure.

I don't understand where you see any deception, great or otherwise.

Who says they are going to be required to develop new hardware controllers? There are laptops, like the ones used by AMD, that because they use eDP can already do it. They obviously already have whatever hardware is required.

Besides, even if it requires new monitors going forward, so what. G-sync doesn't magically work on existing monitors either. All AMD is doing is making it part of an open standard that nVidia can't charge us for and develop hardware to limit it to their own cards.

If you, or anyone else, wants to pay the premium for G-Sync and buy the particular models that it's incorporated on, you can. This isn't stopping nVidia from continuing with G-Sync.

 

[ocre]

AMD doesn't make monitors. They are updating the standard to make "Free-Sync" work on any monitor that adheres to the standard.



AMD said that it might be possible for some monitors to be retrofitted with a firmware update. They would know better since they designed the DP standard. I never said it uses existing standards.

I'm not saying that it will magically work on existing monitors. A monitor will obviously have to be DP1.2a compliant. Thing is, it's not going to be put on individual models at ~$200 extra for the feature and only work with certain nVidia cards. It will work with any DP1.2a compliant set of devices (monitor and graphics card). Surely better than the currently proposed G-Sync.

All I was actually addressing was the fact that AMD is actively pursuing bringing Free-Sync to market. Unlike what some would have us believe. As far as the likelihood of acceptance goes, come on, what's the likelihood that it won't be? DP is AMD's standard that they gave to the industry. Why would VESA not make the changes?

my entire last post was to bystander, I wasn't saying you claimed freesync used existing standards. I quoted your quote in reference to the article as not to take credit to something you already posted.

bystander was saying freesync uses existing standards.

as for the expense of gsync, it is not cheap. Supposedly these early boards are expensive and nvidia is working to have a much cheaper solution. but you are missing the point. you cannot possibly know how well freesync will compare to Gsync. we don't know if it will measure up at all. If your an early adopter to Gsync, you might have to invest more but it is proven and it is here, right now. you can't argue against gsync with vaporware that hasn't even been tested. and your blind trust that it will be just as good and cheaper whenever it comes out is cute and all but the rest of the world would like to see what if offers and for how much when it gets here.

I mean, I can go inventing scenarios to. I can make stuff up in my head to. in this version gsync chips come way down in price and the monitors cost but a few pennies more. in this made up future, freesync doesn't compete at all once it comes out. it still has lag issues and studder. see, easy enough.
but that's not what I want to accomplish. (and thats not at all what i think or want)

I am saying that this direction is welcomed. but it would be much smarter to reserve any strong opinions until this all pans out.

 

[3DVagabond]

my entire last post was to bystander, I wasn't saying you claimed freesync used existing standards. I quoted your quote in reference to the article as not to take credit does something you already posted.

bystander was saying freesync uses existing standards.

as for the expense of gsync, it is not cheap. Supposedly these early boards are expensive and nvidia is working to have a much cheaper solution. but you are missing the point. you cannot possibly know how well freesync will compare to sync. we don't know if it will measure up at all. If your an early adopter to sync, you might have to invest more but it is proven and it is here now. you can't argue against gsync with vaporware that hasn't even been tested. and your blind trust that it will be just as good and cheaper whenever it comes out is cute and all but the rest of the world would like to see what if offers and for how much when it gets here.

I mean, I can go inventing scenarios to. I can make stuff up on my head to. in this version gsync chips come way down in price and the monitors cost a few pennies more. in this made up future, freesync doesn't compete at all once it comes out. it still has lag issues and studded. see, easy enough.

Well, I accept it wasn't addressed at me. I misinterpreted it.

As far as everything you did just say to me

We'll see how it plays out. While you might think my optimism is cute, I think your skepticism is borderline conspiracy theory. So, we'll see how it turns out. I am optimistic.

 

[bystander36]

AMD said that it might be possible for some monitors to be retrofitted with a firmware update. They would know better since they designed the DP standard. I never said it uses existing standards.

I'm not saying that it will magically work on existing monitors. A monitor will obviously have to be DP1.2a compliant. Thing is, it's not going to be put on individual models at ~$200 extra for the feature and only work with certain nVidia cards. It will work with any DP1.2a compliant set of devices (monitor and graphics card). Surely better than the currently proposed G-Sync.

All I was actually addressing was the fact that AMD is actively pursuing bringing Free-Sync to market. Unlike what some would have us believe. As far as the likelihood of acceptance goes, come on, what's the likelihood that it won't be? DP is AMD's standard that they gave to the industry. Why would VESA not make the changes?

Just to be clear, as you love to through around $200+ when talking about G-sync. G-sync DYI kits are ~$200. The monitors which come with it installed, are supposed to be only ~$100 extra. We don't have those yet, but the ~$200 is only for the do-it-yourself'ers welling to pay extra now or with existing monitors.

 

[3DVagabond]

Just to be clear, as you love to through around $200+ when talking about G-sync. G-sync DYI kits are ~$200. The monitors which come with it installed, are supposed to be only ~$100 extra. We don't have those yet, but the ~$200 is only for the do-it-yourself'ers welling to pay extra now or with existing monitors.

We'll see, I guess. BTW, I don't "love throwing around the $200+". I'm not sure why you are saying that. What I actually wrote was ~$200. I realize it could be less. Unless nVidia all of a sudden gets a conscience though, it's pretty certain they will charge as much as they possibly can for it.

BTW, notice how I'm not calling it vaporware or hype though, simply because we can't buy them yet?

 

[csbin]

http://www.hardware.fr/news/13545/amd-freesync-proposition-dp-1-2a.html

Now we just need panel/monitor manufacturers to create the scaler that can support variable refresh rates

 

[3DVagabond]

Sorry, but this will get locked and we'll get directed to the Free-Sync thread.

 

[Mand]

Who says they are going to be required to develop new hardware controllers?

AMD, Nvidia, and at least one display manufacturer.

 

[blackened23]

The cost of the G-sync DIY kit is because it is FPGA. FPGA costs a ton of money, ASIC doesn't. FPGA is quick to market, ASIC isn't. The first kits are FPGA because they are quicker to develop, but G-sync will eventually be integrated into monitors with ASIC and will not cost a lot. But let's all just play stupid and go along with the free-sync deception. It'll go well with other AMD untruths such as unlocking monitors with firmware (LOL), nvidia using hardware because they don't support variable refresh in hardware (Another untruth -- stated by an AMD rep no less ) and that free-sync is free (It requires a variable refresh board in the monitor just as G-sync does).

Nvidia's engineers aren't morons, they explored the possibility of doing this on exiting monitors without a variable refresh board and it was not possible. So their solution was to tackle the problem head on and solve the problem. So I find it absolutely hilarious that AMD "speculated" that it "could" be possible on existing monitors. Guess what happened there? PCPer press Raja Kojiri about this issue and HE ADMITTED that free-sync will require monitors to have a variable refresh board just like g-sync. What monitors on the market now can be retrofitted for free-sync? There are none.

Anyway, nvidia didn't say a word about g-sync until it was done and ready. What they didn't do was create a marketing campaign based on hope, to give their fan base the "hope" of having a product some time in the future. That is what AMD is doing. This is ignoring the fact that G-sync is an actual usable product right now, and free-sync is what. I hesitate to even call it a product. It's in the earliest stages of development and isn't even close to hitting the market.

Maybe it'll be here in 2015 if we're ever so lucky. Or maybe it will be another HD3D where AMD claims "free and open standards", releases the API, and then everyone ignores it while it is eventually abandoned. I could see that happening as well. In any case, any reasonable person would not pin their hopes on the marketing promises of AMD - AMD's marketing promises and powerpoints have a well established record of being FOS. A reasonable person would want to see an actual product in use before making sweeping statements about cost between the two and performance between the two.

Once, just once, I want to see action instead of words out of AMD. I've said it before. Actions are louder than words, action is respectable, hype and vaporware is not respectable. Please, more action, less marketing. More action with a product that is usable and exists, and less marketing hype and vaporware.

 

[bystander36]

We'll see, I guess. BTW, I don't "love throwing around the $200+". I'm not sure why you are saying that. What I actually wrote was ~$200. I realize it could be less. Unless nVidia all of a sudden gets a conscience though, it's pretty certain they will charge as much as they possibly can for it.

BTW, notice how I'm not calling it vaporware or hype though, simply because we can't buy them yet?

You were saying $300 before. That is why I added the +.

 

[3DVagabond]

You were saying $300 before. That is why I added the +.

That's because at the time it was $300 to get the G-Sync module installed. I haven't really been paying attention lately because I'm not that concerned. I figured rather than get into a peeing contest. I'd just say ~$200. Didn't work though. :shrug:

All I did was point out that it's been put forth to be added to the DP1.2a spec, so AMD is actively pursuing it. Like I said, if anyone would rather buy expensive proprietary tech when the monitors do arrive, go for it. This makes me optimistic that we are going to get it in a free and open standard instead, which I prefer.

 

[Mand]

That's because at the time it was $300 to get the G-Sync module installed. I haven't really been paying attention lately because I'm not that concerned. I figured rather than get into a peeing contest. I'd just say ~$200. Didn't work though. :shrug:

All I did was point out that it's been put forth to be added to the DP1.2a spec, so AMD is actively pursuing it. Like I said, if anyone would rather buy expensive proprietary tech when the monitors do arrive, go for it. This makes me optimistic that we are going to get it in a free and open standard instead, which I prefer.

"actively pursuing it" is a rather significant overstatement. What Nvidia has done with G-Sync is working directly with display manufacturers, literally designing hardware for their individual panels. That is what active pursuit looks like.

Sure, it's nice that support will be in a DP spec. But that doesn't mean that any existing displays will be compatible, and it CERTAINLY doesn't make it live up to the name "Free."

 

[bystander36]

I'm sure AMD will come up with a solution, and likely leave it to the display manufacturers to implement it. Much like HD3D.

 

[ocre]

That's because at the time it was $300 to get the G-Sync module installed. I haven't really been paying attention lately because I'm not that concerned. I figured rather than get into a peeing contest. I'd just say ~$200. Didn't work though. :shrug:

All I did was point out that it's been put forth to be added to the DP1.2a spec, so AMD is actively pursuing it. Like I said, if anyone would rather buy expensive proprietary tech when the monitors do arrive, go for it. This makes me optimistic that we are going to get it in a free and open standard instead, which I prefer.

like mantle? bahaha
Interesting the flip flopping from AMD. They are all about open standards when its convenient. lol
But back on topic:

I am all about the industry moving forward. And quite frankly i dont care how we get there, just that we do progress. And in this case, it starts off rather odd. Nvidia creates Gsync and AMD in turn downplays it completely. They claims they dont even know what Nvidia is trying to fix, that there is no need for anything when all the technology has been there for ages, that perhaps nvidia needed to add a chip because their GPUs are lacking features AMD has had activated for years, etc. We went from there to AMD submitting a request for a change to the DisplayPort Standard.

It is nice to see AMD actually taken steps to address the problem, this i am happy to admit. It only validates the fact that there was a problem and validates the need for gsync or something like it. I am not against freesync, not for a second. Bring it on i say. But i am not quick to forget AMDs words at CES where they completely down played Gsync and acted like where confused by what Nvidia intended to solve with it. If they really didnt get it, then i am very skeptical freesync will be able to hold up to gsync if and when it comes out. And this is my only point i want to get across.

I wouldnt be surprised that eventually AMD tries to solve the same issues Nvidia set to solve with Gsync. But with no time to market and no way to see how it fairs, I am not gonna let my imagination run wild. I think this proves one thing without a doubt, that there was a problem Nvidia set out to solve with Gsync. And havine a solution to this problem benefits PC gamers. This cannot be denied. Now to be upset with Nvidia trying to solve said issue, thats insane. Even if its an expensive solution right now, it is a step in the right direction.

It is a step that AMD noticed. And they will follow suit or get left behind. Freesync may end up being a much cheaper real alternative. But then again, it may not. Its nice to see AMD seriously try to tackle the issues that Nvidia solved with gsync. I am all for research and development in this area. This is a real step forward in my opinion. Its been long long over due.

 

[3DVagabond]

"actively pursuing it" is a rather significant overstatement. What Nvidia has done with G-Sync is working directly with display manufacturers, literally designing hardware for their individual panels. That is what active pursuit looks like.

Sure, it's nice that support will be in a DP spec. But that doesn't mean that any existing displays will be compatible, and it CERTAINLY doesn't make it live up to the name "Free."

What nVidia has done is looking more like active pursuit of an easy buck. We're talking about a simple DP update and nVidia has hyped it up to be the next big thing in gaming that we all need to thank them for with our wallets open.

As far as free goes, if it's part of the DP standard it will be free for everyone to use. There will be no additional fees paid to AMD or nVidia because AMD gave us DP for free. Whether or not it makes the displays more expensive, I don't know? Do you know, or are you just thread crapping? BY the way, are you starting to see where free fits into Free-Sync?

I'm sure AMD will come up with a solution, and likely leave it to the display manufacturers to implement it. Much like HD3D.

Seems like they've already implemented it on their end of the DP cable. They've even designed the way for it to be done on the Monitor manufacturers end of the DP cable and are giving it to them (wait for it now...) for free.

like mantle? bahaha
Interesting the flip flopping from AMD. They are all about open standards when its convenient. lol
But back on topic:

Off topic thread crapping? I mean it's not even good enough to be called sarcasm.

I am all about the industry moving forward. And quite frankly i dont care how we get there, just that we do progress. And in this case, it starts off rather odd. Nvidia creates Gsync and AMD in turn downplays it completely. They claims they dont even know what Nvidia is trying to fix, that there is no need for anything when all the technology has been there for ages, that perhaps nvidia needed to add a chip because their GPUs are lacking features AMD has had activated for years, etc. We went from there to AMD submitting a request for a change to the DisplayPort Standard.

No, they didn't claim any such thing.

It is nice to see AMD actually taken steps to address the problem, this i am happy to admit. It only validates the fact that there was a problem and validates the need for gsync or something like it. I am not against freesync, not for a second. Bring it on i say. But i am not quick to forget AMDs words at CES where they completely down played Gsync and acted like where confused by what Nvidia intended to solve with it. If they really didnt get it, then i am very skeptical freesync will be able to hold up to gsync if and when it comes out. And this is my only point i want to get across.

What AMD is doing is attempting to stop nVidia from making a money grab off of a standard that AMD gave (here comes that word again) for free to the industry. Now maybe it is possible nVidia didn't realize the DP was natively capable of this with a simple software rewrite? Nah, they're smarter than that certainly?

I wouldnt be surprised that eventually AMD tries to solve the same issues Nvidia set to solve with Gsync. But with no time to market and no way to see how it fairs, I am not gonna let my imagination run wild. I think this proves one thing without a doubt, that there was a problem Nvidia set out to solve with Gsync. And havine a solution to this problem benefits PC gamers. This cannot be denied. Now to be upset with Nvidia trying to solve said issue, thats insane. Even if its an expensive solution right now, it is a step in the right direction.

It is a step that AMD noticed. And they will follow suit or get left behind. Freesync may end up being a much cheaper real alternative. But then again, it may not. Its nice to see AMD seriously try to tackle the issues that Nvidia solved with gsync. I am all for research and development in this area. This is a real step forward in my opinion. Its been long long over due.

You must really lack reading comprehension if you believe what you just wrote. AMD's reaction and response to G-Sync is nothing like you are describing. It was more like, "What are they up to? They want to claim that's something they invented and charge for it? We'll just add the eDP feature to the DP1.2 standard and be done with it." When asked why nVidia was doing it the way they are their response was, "I don't know? Maybe their cards can't do that? Ours have done it for years."

 

[Mondozei]

like mantle? bahaha
Interesting the flip flopping from AMD. They are all about open standards when its convenient. lol

And it's better to incredibly hostile to open standards like Nvidia is?
(lol)

I am all about the industry moving forward. And quite frankly i dont care how we get there, just that we do progress. And in this case, it starts off rather odd. Nvidia creates Gsync and AMD in turn downplays it completely. They claims they dont even know what Nvidia is trying to fix, that there is no need for anything when all the technology has been there for ages, that perhaps nvidia needed to add a chip because their GPUs are lacking features AMD has had activated for years, etc. We went from there to AMD submitting a request for a change to the DisplayPort Standard.

It is nice to see AMD actually taken steps to address the problem, this i am happy to admit. It only validates the fact that there was a problem and validates the need for gsync or something like it. I am not against freesync, not for a second. Bring it on i say. But i am not quick to forget AMDs words at CES where they completely down played Gsync and acted like where confused by what Nvidia intended to solve with it. If they really didnt get it, then i am very skeptical freesync will be able to hold up to gsync if and when it comes out. And this is my only point i want to get across.

I wouldnt be surprised that eventually AMD tries to solve the same issues Nvidia set to solve with Gsync. But with no time to market and no way to see how it fairs, I am not gonna let my imagination run wild. I think this proves one thing without a doubt, that there was a problem Nvidia set out to solve with Gsync. And havine a solution to this problem benefits PC gamers. This cannot be denied. Now to be upset with Nvidia trying to solve said issue, thats insane. Even if its an expensive solution right now, it is a step in the right direction.

It is a step that AMD noticed. And they will follow suit or get left behind. Freesync may end up being a much cheaper real alternative. But then again, it may not. Its nice to see AMD seriously try to tackle the issues that Nvidia solved with gsync. I am all for research and development in this area. This is a real step forward in my opinion. Its been long long over due.

Tell me again if you are pro or against?

But yes, Nvidia made a very good move (in theory) with G-Sync.
Where it does piss a lot of people off is that they want to charge for something that ought to be open standard.

Would AMD start charging for G-Sync if they came up with it first(and called it R-Synd or something)?

It's highly possible. But that doesn't really detract from the overall point that Nvidia is regressing into their old bad habits of excessive greed. Freesync's current viability is far from crystal clear but I think the concept does illuminate the fact that it doesn't take a lot for future monitors to enable this feature for free, hence the brilliance of the name because it underscores the greed of Nvidia and those quick to defend that greed.

For now I am a lot less sanguine on AMD's efforts than I am on Nvidia's from a technical perspective. We know G-Sync works. FreeSync is theoretical at best and thus far it's a messy picture.

But it would undoubtedly benefit all of us if Freesync worked as good or better than AMD hopes. It would put pressure on pricing and open up competition. This technology should not be an addon, but it should be standard for all desktop monitors and compatible with all cards. That is the optimal outcome for me(I don't care about the AMD/NV angle) and as such I am interested in Freesync succeeding even if I have an NV card.
And it also doesn't stop me from pointing out the greediness of the company that produces my GPU. Nor should it do for you.

 

[Gloomy]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-nvidia-g-sync-review

Overall, G-Sync is a hardware triumph, but the quest for a consistent, enjoyable gameplay experience is far from over. By eliminating the video artefacts, G-Sync lays bare the underlying problems of wildly variable gameplay frame-rates in PC gaming and highlights the problems of inconsistent input latency. If the hardware issue is now fixed, what's required now are software solutions to make the most of this exceptional technology.

All we need is DX12 now

or Mantle

EDIT: Whoops, thought this was the GSYNC thread. There's no difference :|

 

[blackened23]

It's highly possible. But that doesn't really detract from the overall point that Nvidia is regressing into their old bad habits of excessive greed. Freesync's current viability is far from crystal clear but I think the concept does illuminate the fact that it doesn't take a lot for future monitors to enable this feature for free, hence the brilliance of the name because it underscores the greed of Nvidia and those quick to defend that greed.

I love that AMD's marketing characterizes nvidia and intel as the "bad guys" which are out to get us all. Please, spare us. Intel and nvidia are evil, out to get us. Intel is cheating with compilers, both intel and nvidia are greedy. I keep reading stuff like this all the time and it's beyond silly. Meanwhile, AMD, the not for profit organization is going to save the world for a better mankind. Yeah. Okay. Whatever.

Please spare us of the nonsense. It really is quite annoying to see stuff like this to no end, because it's silly.

As has been mentioned, there are two factors here. One, the initial high cost of the DIY G-sync kit is because it is FPGA. FPGA has trade-offs: that is extremely high cost, but it is *very* quick to develop. On the other hand - ASIC is low in cost, and very slow to develop. The idea here was the initial kits would be FPGA to enter market quicker, but these will switch to ASIC over time and be input into monitors as such, and will not be high as cost.

Second factor. AMD's freesync costs money in the same areas as g-sync does, since it requires a variable refresh rate control board installed into any monitor supporting it. AMD's reps made several non-factual statements at CES about this requirement not being present. About a "firmware upgrade" magically converting a monitor into free-sync. PCPer, of course, questioned AMD repeatedly about this and Raja Kojiri admitted that free-sync will in fact require a variable refresh control board just as g-sync does. This means that free-sync, when and if it ever exists, will require costs in the same area as g-sync does. If free-sync uses FPGA for this, it will cost a lot. When it converts to ASIC, it will not cost a lot.

 

[McLovin42]

"actively pursuing it" is a rather significant overstatement. What Nvidia has done with G-Sync is working directly with display manufacturers, literally designing hardware for their individual panels. That is what active pursuit looks like.

Sure, it's nice that support will be in a DP spec. But that doesn't mean that any existing displays will be compatible, and it CERTAINLY doesn't make it live up to the name "Free."

Exactly, great points that are 100% valid and 100% fact based.

..............and still loving my Gsync module as much as the day I got it.

All AMD did was try and deflect potential sales towards Nvidia products with an extreme alpha demo on a laptop showing what "freesync" might look like literally YEARS down the road to try and counter Nvidia's new legit release(And AMD/ATI has been doing this for over a DECADE now too). Problem is, its not going to catch on or even be implemented for YEARS, if at all.

Nvidia on the other hand, released what they said was going to be released, its available NOW and already there are a half dozen to a dozen more monitors slated to be released for sale with Gsync preinstalled within the next 3-6 months.

 

[Mand]

What nVidia has done is looking more like active pursuit of an easy buck. We're talking about a simple DP update and nVidia has hyped it up to be the next big thing in gaming that we all need to thank them for with our wallets open.

Really. Because this rep from a display manufacturer would seem to disagree:

http://overlordforum.com/topic/603-nvidia-g-sync/page-5

So here is where GSYNC for Tempests stand: in queue.

Since Nvidia handles all the board design for all the OEMs on the planet, for any and all panels they request, Nvidia is a bit overwhelmed at the moment. I was told yesterday that Nvidia only has so much "bandwidth" (person hours) for GSYNC design and those engineers are working their tails off trying to get all the boards done as soon as possible.

What does this mean for our requested panel design? We are not in process yet, but their engineers want to get ours out. However, the larger OEMs are first to be served, which makes sense since Overlord is very small compared to all the others. For now it seems only TN-related panels are being designed.

It is good news that Nvidia's engineers want to tackle our panel and OC PCBs - it is somewhat bad news that there isn't enough hours in the day to get everything done! I was told our panel will be designed, but not when. There also seems to be some discussion as to what extent the overclock on the panel would be set and how that all would work. That discussion is for a later time once the engineers take a look at our gerbers and decide how to best tackle GSYNC and our panel.

Overall, this means once the design is complete we would offer the same deal going for the ASUS 248 panel (and others that will be coming in the next 6 months with GSYNC) - a pre-done panel with GSYNC, a mod service, and a kit (that is the plan at this moment). Of course, all of this can change at any time since we are at the mercy of Nvidia and their schedule.

GSYNC does require an entirely new PCB with display port only. There is no module that clicks into any existing PCB since the entire board, with the module, must be tuned to the specific panel being used.

This is the cause for the delay. Nvidia has to hand tune every PCB (input and in some cases the timing controller) to match the panel every OEM wants to use.

Again, we are hoping to have something within the next few months to test, but aren't holding our breath. The goal is to have the new Gsync version available, with a mod service, and a standalone kit. How all this will work is still up in the air as it depends on PCB design, sizing, etc.

Bolded for emphasis.


If it were as simple as a spec update, do you think that Nvidia engineers would be putting in these sorts of man-hours? Just to fake it to screw you out of your money? By lying to display manufacturers, who call G-Sync " a monster step forward for all gamers" ?


Seriously?

Not to mention AMD itself says it will require new hardware. I don't see how you can dismiss that so casually, even if you do believe everything out of Nvidia is lying propaganda.

 

[Despoiler]

like mantle? bahaha
Interesting the flip flopping from AMD. They are all about open standards when its convenient. lol

Except DX isn't an open standard. OGL is the only open standard and AMD has stated their goal is to get Mantle calls put into it.

Back on topic, 1.2a DP or DP 1.3 will be here faster than G-Sync as Mand points out. Nvidia is backlogged trying to design new boards for every display manufacturer. Multiply that by how many different panels they want G-Sync in....widespread G-Sync adoption isn't going to happen. I think Benq is slated to have their displays out Q1.

The new DP 1.2a standard, if approved, will go to the manufacturers and they figure out how to support it on their already existing board. At least in the case of DP 1.2a it really is just a new firmware version for them. 1.2a is only modifying how DP operates in the logical definitions of the spec. No physical changes where requested. DP 1.3 they will update naturally just like they have with all other DP versions prior.

 

[Mand]

The new DP 1.2a standard, if approved, will go to the manufacturers and they figure out how to support it on their already existing board. At least in the case of DP 1.2a it really is just a new firmware version for them. 1.2a is only modifying how DP operates in the logical definitions of the spec. No physical changes where requested. DP 1.3 they will update naturally just like they have with all other DP versions prior.

This is utterly false. AMD itself has confirmed that it would require a variable-refresh compatible control board in order to make FreeSync work, and no desktop displays have them.

It really isn't just a new firmware version, no matter what you think a spec update actually changes.

And I really wish you wouldn't speak for me. DP spec updates may roll out before G-Sync becomes widespread, but that does not mean that FreeSync will be widespread before G-Sync. Not even remotely close. G-Sync is here, now, and being implemented. FreeSync requires, as confirmed by AMD, display manufacturers to do the development work of integrating variable-refresh control boards into their displays. That is not going to be fast, free, or take the form of a firmware update.

So, to explain a little bit about why it requires a hardware update, I ask you this: even if DP, a connection spec, supports the protocols for anything and everything required to send out frames at a variable rate and instruct the monitor to change its refresh timing accordingly, how will that actually matter if the display itself isn't capable of actually doing the variable refresh? The signals will come in, the display will get confused, and continue refreshing at 60 Hz because that's how the liquid crystal panel is designed. Unless there's something to actually understand the incoming variable refresh-instructions, having those instructions there doesn't do a damn bit of good.

And right now, there are no desktop displays that can understand variable refresh instructions. None except for those with G-Sync modules in them.

 

[sushiwarrior]

Second factor. AMD's freesync costs money in the same areas as g-sync does, since it requires a variable refresh rate control board installed into any monitor supporting it. AMD's reps made several non-factual statements at CES about this requirement not being present. About a "firmware upgrade" magically converting a monitor into free-sync. PCPer, of course, questioned AMD repeatedly about this and Raja Kojiri admitted that free-sync will in fact require a variable refresh control board just as g-sync does. This means that free-sync, when and if it ever exists, will require costs in the same area as g-sync does. If free-sync uses FPGA for this, it will cost a lot. When it converts to ASIC, it will not cost a lot.

You don't understand what G-sync does, it pretty much replaces the entire display controller. It's a whole new controller. Absolutely different. That's more than just "supporting variable refresh". It has logic to do prediction/colour correction and all that at the display, rather than on the card. Free-syncs suggested solution is a display controller that accepts VBLANK/variable refresh commands, without any of the associated logic or memory. That's a monumental difference. I'd compare AMD's solution to changing the tires on a car, while Nvidia is fixing the problem by installing an entirely new drivetrain.