[TechPowerUp article] FreeSync explained in more detail

[blackened23]

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.

Okay. Thank you for agreeing that AMD requires a new board in the monitor just like nvidia does with g-sync. Now you can argue over little details as far as what is installed on free-sync boards versus g-sync boards but the fact of the matter is: G-sync is a product. Freesync is vaporware - the fact that AMD is marketing this to give their users hope while it is still in the vaporware stage is absolutely detestable. Additionally, the high initial cost of G-sync DIY kits is related to the fact that it is FPGA; FPGA is extremely costly but easy to develop and get to market. Once g-sync kits convert to ASIC, those costs will go down exponentially.

Did nvidia pull off such shenanigans? Marketing with half truths to give their user base the "hope" of having a product at an unspecified time frame? No, they didn't. They announced g-sync when it was done. So that brings us back to the point which you did not disagree with. Regardless of where you get your interesting and insightful information (hmm?), both require new boards and new boards for actual functionality. Again, this was confirmed by AMD's head graphics guy, Kojira. Now if anyone wants to argue with him, go for it. I'd assume that AMD's head VP of visual computing knows what the heck he's talking about.

None of this changes the fact that marketing based on hopes and dreams on an unfinished product is detestable. However, after HD3D and eyefinity-CF being broken for so long, it really isn't surprising for AMD to do just that. It is status quo for them. More marketing, more talk, and less action.

I want more action from AMD. More action with actual products, and less marketing garbage. The marketing nonsense is just so. so. so. so. OLD. I want AMD to shut the EFF up and deliver a product, and waste less time having their marketing team bore us with exaggerated powerpoint promises.

 

[McLovin42]

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.

Well, regardless of how the analogy goes, at least Nvidia has a working product out NOW. Whether its just a tire change or not. You don't need to speculate, or wait YEARS for the technology to possibly rear its head or not. If you want silky smooth video performance with no tearing, stuttering or lag from 30fps all the way up to a minitors refresh max using a single or multiple cards, you can have that. I pad the extra $200. It was just as worthwhile to me as paying a premium for a quality video card or a pair of em. To me it was money very well spent and I don't need to haw and speculate on a forum thread for the next X amount of years waiting for something to materialize.

That in itself is well worth the price paid.

 

[Mand]

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.

Then why did AMD also say that FreeSync requires a whole new controller?

 

[blackened23]

Then why did AMD also say that FreeSync requires a whole new controller?

I was also entertaining this question. Either he knows more than AMD's VP of visual computing, or there's something i'm missing here. PCPer pressed AMD on this very issue and after getting non-factual answers, AMD's Kojira finally came clean. He admitted that free-sync requires a new board just like g-sync does.

The two AMD clowns that demo'ed free-sync at CES, on the other hand, were rife with lies. Maybe they were unintentional lies, but nonetheless: They said that monitors could be retrofitted with a firmware update (NOT TRUE). Then they said nvidia doesn't support variable refresh in hardware (NOT TRUE). Then they said they didn't know *why* nvidia was using a hardware solution and it was because their hardware could not support it (NOT TRUE, and AMD will require a controller board all the same). What's the recurring theme here?

I think i'll just go with the answer provided by AMD's head graphics guy instead.

 

[Despoiler]

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.

You really need to read the proposal and understand how DP works. There is nothing in this proposal that changes anything physical. They are adding an option to the logical function of DP. Display manufacturers can use their same boards with new firmware.

Here is the proposal summary.

Summary
Extend the "MSA TIMING PARAMETER IGNORE" option to DisplayPort to enable source based control of the frame rate similar to embedded DisplayPort.

Intellectual property rights
N/A

Benefits as a result of changes
This enables the ability for external DisplayPort to take advantage of the option to ignore MSA timing parameter and have the sink slave to source timing to realize per frame dynamic refresh rate.

Assessment of the impact
The proposed change enable per frame dynamic refresh rate for single stream devices that expose dynamic refresh rate capability in EDID for DisplayPort interface. The source will be able to enable this with an SST interface or MST hub with physical ports. Logical MST port support of the feature is not included as part of this SCR. A generic framework to enable such feature for logical port is required that can accommodate other feature where stream related configuration is programmed in DPCD.

Analysis of the device software implication
SST device which support "MSA TIMING PARAMETER IGNORE" option will be able to expose the capability in EDID and DPCD to let source enable dynamic refresh rate.
Source driver would have to be updated to parse EDID and enable "MSA TIMING PARAMETER IGNORE" feature when source want the sink to be refreshed based on its update rate.

Analysis of the compliance test and interop implications
Currently this feature is tested as part of eDP CTS. New test would have to be added as part of DP LL CTS and EDID CTS.

Here is the DP overview.

http://www.vesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/ICCE-Presentation-on-VESA-DisplayPort.pdf

 

[Mand]

You really need to read the proposal and understand how DP works.

You really need to understand that AMD's graphics head said that it requires new hardware. Was he lying?

Updating the commands that can be sent down the cable does NOTHING to ensure that the display on the other end of it can actually understand those commands. Doing so requires new hardware, as was confirmed by AMD.

 

[DigDog]

Though G-Sync and FreeSync interest me very much, i hesitate to post in this thread;

First, the product of G-s looks amazing for what it does. I believe we can all agree with that - a upscaled version of Lightboost, available now, and essentially the holy grail of PFS players .. CRT-like quality from a LCD.

I find the cost very high, as i think we can *all* agree; early adapters and all that, but a monitor which is already $100 more expensive, with another $200 worth of gear in it, plus a high end NVidia GPU, and a few hours of fumbling around inside the monitor with a screwdriver - you have to be a really dedicated player to invest that much.

Ofc this situation will get better, but let's talk AMD for a sec, because it might be relevant.

AMD has a concept called FreeSync, which might be close or far from materializing on high framerate desktop monitors- any more info on this is speculation.
People who believe that either AMD or NV would *not* pull a PR stunt to undermine their competitor are naive, because they both would do it, regardless if you think that either of these is the "good guys" company while the other is the "evil" company.

I find it perfectly reasonable for NV supporters to believe that this was - in the vast majority - a PR stunt, while FreeSync is barely a concept;
I likewise find it reasonable for AMD supporters to believe that AMD takes this concept very seriously, and are really going to come out reasonably soon with a live product - both scenarios are possible, and we don't have any *current* information to help us predict future events.

We do have some past histories, upon which one might speculate, but you can never really tell; maybe the company which has horrible products which explode - Rosewill for example - comes out one day and starts to produce amazing, high quality, great value hardware.

As we stand now, those like me who see the NV point of view as more likely, argue that while AMD only needs some minor variations on their hardware and drivers, the monitor manufacturers will have to change the way their PCBs are designed .. and that this will be just as expensive - and not free - as G-s because, essentially, it's the same thing.

People who prefer AMD's point of view believe that the change to the way monitors behave will be something carrying a minute cost difference, plus again a very minor adaptation to the DP standard.

Personally, i find it hard to believe that NV engineers would have missed such a possibility, since it's reasonable to say both AMD and NV techs are equally talented, and they would do without the addition of a controller on teh monitor if they could.
(it also implies that the minor cost difference AMD proposes will not be minor at all)

On this point, i STRONGLY hope AMD is right and NV is wrong - if i can get the same Something-Sync without having to pay $200, i'd be happier, obviously.
I've already said i find it technically unlikely, but as some might say "i'm not a lawyer", well, i'm not an engineer, IANAE.

But my argument for today is: if, and i say "if", AMD has anything at all which looks like, performs like or can in any way compete with G-s .. they better bring it out NAU!

You will remember what happened between VHS and the superior Betamax - for market reasons, the inferior VHS won;

And since the NV solution is out, AMD need to hit the market as soon as possible, not in two years. Because NV will, like the good cutthroat business they are, strangle the market by putting their tech *everywhere*, and proprietary or not, once it's everywhere, nobody will even consider the AMD alternative, and no competition is never good for consumers.

Also, the longer a product is on the market, and starts earning a revenue, the sooner the owning company can invest in R&D and fab, bringing down the price.

Also, if FreeSync is as real as the fanboyest fanboy wants it to be, NV will copy the f* out of it. You really think if AMD find a way to do the same thing G-s does, but *without* the controller, then NV wouldn't do the same?

Either way, i won't be buying either until i can get a 27" for $400. I know many people here won't buy until they can get IPS. By that time, who knows what will have changed.

 

[Mand]

Either way, i won't be buying either until i can get a 27" for $400. I know many people here won't buy until they can get IPS. By that time, who knows what will have changed.

Which is entirely fair. The people getting it now are knowingly and willingly paying an early-adopter premium, but that's largely because it's so awesome. Anyone who has actually used it, from reviewers to end users posting in threads, has been uniformly positive about just how much a difference it makes.

Sure, eventually, it'll become "standard" for all serious gaming, in the same way that LCDs have become standard over CRTs. And eventually, without that differentiator of having it versus a market that largely doesn't have it, the price will settle back down again.

But until that happens, people paying for newly-developed hardware will be enjoying a fundamentally superior gaming experience. Whether you think it's worth it or not, it's pretty significant.

 

[Despoiler]

You really need to understand that AMD's graphics head said that it requires new hardware. Was he lying?

Updating the commands that can be sent down the cable does NOTHING to ensure that the display on the other end of it can actually understand those commands. Doing so requires new hardware, as was confirmed by AMD.

No, but what I read was that he was referring to DP 1.3, which will be a new controller. I suspect that the DP 1.3 implementation is going to be more of an elegant, ground up implementation than what we are currently seeing. Basically G-Sync and Free-Sync are "hacks" of the DP spec. The 1.2a update, if approved, will be a continuance of it. Again, see spec for how it works. The display manufacturers will have to rewrite their clocking interface so it slave off the line, but you can do that without a new board. Changing clock sources is really standard in the electronics world.

 

[Mand]

you can do that without a new board

Source, please. Please explain how this is so easy to do and simple with just a connection spec update, when AMD, Nvidia and display manufacturers ALL agree that it will take new hardware. Why should I believe you, and not them?

 

[blackened23]

No, but what I read was that he was referring to DP 1.3, which will be a new controller. I suspect that the DP 1.3 implementation is going to be more of an elegant, ground up implementation than what we are currently seeing. Basically G-Sync and Free-Sync are "hacks" of the DP spec. The 1.2a update, if approved, will be a continuance of it. Again, see spec for how it works. The display manufacturers will have to rewrite their clocking interface so it slave off the line, but you can do that without a new board. Changing clock sources is really standard in the electronics world.

Your speculation is running wild. As mentioned above, please explain how free sync and g-sync are hacks. Please explain how this will be "easy". Please explain your intimate knowledge of assembling monitors from start to finish. Please explain how you know more than AMD's head graphics guy and display manufacturers.

You're doing nothing but passing off speculation and truth when AMD's head graphics guy said otherwise. Apparently you know more than he does. Apparently you're more of an expert than the actual people developing the products. Please by all means fill us in with your area of expertise. If you don't know, which I strongly suspect you don't, then don't pass off your speculation as some sort of truth. Don't pass off something as being "easy" when you really have no clue about it.

If you want anyone to believe you or take you seriously, tell us your credentials, otherwise the obvious answer has already been provided by both nvidia's engineers and AMD's head of visual computing. We know that these guys are experts in their field. They already stated that new hardware is required. AMD's head VP of visual computing already stated that a modified DP spec does not alleviate the need for a new board to be installed in any potential free-sync monitor. This is, again, all outlined at PCPer. Again, these are all experts in their field. No offense, but who are you to say otherwise? Your saying otherwise tells us that you obviously have more knowledge and expertise than nvidia's combined engineers and AMD's head of visual computing.

I think i'll pass on random forum user #432117 telling me something that contradicts known experts in field - unless you have some amazing credentials to share with us.

 

[Imouto]

Experts in the field only told that you need new hardware, not that it's impossible to make it or any hard. There are already monitors with eDP, namely the ones using the LG LM270WQ1 panel present in the high end Dells, Thunderbolt Apple monitors and the korean 1440p pack (Catleap, etc, etc). To support FreeSync you only need an eDP controller with the feature enabled as you can find in the Toshiba convertible that AMD used for the FreeSync demo.

Only after Dell launched a DP monitor AMD and Nvidia started shipping their cards with that port and people seems to forget that. There was nothing to drive that DP monitor and Dell launched it anyway.

 

[Mand]

Experts in the field only told that you need new hardware, not that it's impossible to make it or any hard.

Experts in the field told us that we need new hardware. They then went about developing said hardware, which has been demonstrated as a difficult, time-consuming process. How can you ignore the statements of the display manufacturer I mentioned? They're chomping at the bit to get variable refresh technology going so they can sell displays that have it. If it were so easy, they would be doing it.

I mean, of course, you could just say that Nvidia's engineers are idiots and are intentionally misleading their display partners, but unless you have any actual evidence to support them beyond "I don't like Nvidia" then I'd ask you to refrain from making such claims.

Warning issued for inflammatory language.
-- stahlhart

 

[Imouto]

Experts in the field told us that we need new hardware. They then went about developing said hardware, which has been demonstrated as a difficult, time-consuming process. How can you ignore the statements of the display manufacturer I mentioned? They're chomping at the bit to get this technology going so they can sell displays that have it. If it were so easy, they would be doing it.

Do you have a hard time with your cognition abilities? It's been so many times that I have to ask, sorry. DP 1.2a isn't out and DP 1.3 is in development. Announcing anything in an unfinished or unreleased spec is beyond dumb. Even more when FreeSync was demoed just a few weeks ago.

Again, the display manufacturer you mentioned is always talking about G-Sync. You can have an eDP controller with VBLANK features and slap it into a desktop monitor with an eDP panel.

I mean, of course, you could just say that Nvidia's engineers are idiots and are intentionally misleading their display partners, but unless you have any actual evidence to support them beyond "I don't like Nvidia" then I'd ask you to refrain from making such claims.

I don't hate Nvidia, it's just that the claim about desktop and mobile displays being in different universes is disgusting. They're trying to sell this feature and it's cool, I'm just puzzled about stuff like that passing as something even close to reality.

Same stuff going for pages already. I'm starting to get a little bored.


Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

-Rvenger

 

[Mand]

You can have an eDP controller with VBLANK features and slap it into a desktop monitor with an eDP panel.

So why hasn't anyone done it?

Also, if you can't post without insulting and attacking me, I see very little reason to continue trying to discuss this with you. Please stop.

Instead of publicizing, hit the report post button please.

-Rvenger

 

[Imouto]

So why hasn't anyone done it?

Because it's been 2 weeks since the demo and it's very likely that no one has the modified driver used in the FreeSync demo?

Stop this, would you kindly?

Also, if you can't post without insulting and attacking me, I see very little reason to continue trying to discuss this with you. Please stop.

Never insulted you, going by your posts in this thread it was a legit and needed question.

 

[Erenhardt]

Can we agree that one g-sync thread is enough and lock it? LOL what a joke


I am not locking either since this is the FreeSync thread and not G-Sync thread.

-Rvenger

 

[videogames101]

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.

can you get me a link for this? i'm interested in what the hell g-sync is doing

 

[Mand]

can you get me a link for this? i'm interested in what the hell g-sync is doing

There's lots of information on what G-Sync is doing. There's very little information on what FreeSync is doing.

G-Sync links:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7582/nvidia-gsync-review
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...grade-Kit-Installation-and-Performance-Review
http://techreport.com/review/25788/a-first-look-at-nvidia-g-sync-display-tech

As far as FreeSync, however, all we have now is some idea of variable refresh. No actual specifics have been given by anyone involved.

 

[Despoiler]

Do you have a hard time with your cognition abilities? It's been so many times that I have to ask, sorry. DP 1.2a isn't out and DP 1.3 is in development.

Actually DP 1.2a is the current version. AMD is asking to modify that version. Whether that will change the version or not I don't know.

I'm not even going to quote all of the people, but this is for all the naysayers. Again, read the spec for DP 1.2a (and understand how it works), read and understand how EDID works, then the proposal for 1.2a modification, then what they are talking about for 1.3 (which is different than what they are doing for 1.2a), and then put it all together.

Both AMD and Nvidia's implementations are hacks of DP. DP 1.2a for Nvidia and eDP for AMD. Nvidia is using vblank interval adjustment and AMD is using eDP's power-saving panel self refresh rate are novel uses of existing features, which is the definition of a hack.

Analysis of the device software implication
SST device which support "MSA TIMING PARAMETER IGNORE" option will be able to expose the capability in EDID and DPCD to let source enable dynamic refresh rate.
Source driver would have to be updated to parse EDID and enable "MSA TIMING PARAMETER IGNORE" feature when source want the sink to be refreshed based on its update rate.

There is no hardware to change when all you are doing is allowing DP's MSA to be ignored(normally it sends once per frame) and also have a new field in EDID (note you can already override EDID with a custom .inf. Go home and try it). They aren't going to build new boards because none of the proposals run up against physical limitations of said boards. They have to rewrite the firmware to add the new spec parameters and them translate them to the Tcon.

Monitors, in general, get firmware updates like a lot of devices do. I did a quick search for programmable display port Tcons and they seem pretty common to me. Knock yourself out.

http://www.vesa.org/displayport-developer/certified-components/

I'm sure the rebuttal will just be more parroting from Nvidias technical marketing director aka a glorified sales person. Again, PCper said the controllers needed to understand what the DP spec is doing. It didn't say it wasn't possible. If the controllers are programmable.....you can follow that logically.

 

[Mand]

I'm sure the rebuttal will just be more parroting from Nvidias technical marketing director aka a glorified sales person.

Actually, it's parroting from AMD's head graphics guy, who says it DOES require new hardware.

Still hoping for an actual response to that, which has been quoted in this very thread.

 

[ocre]

I don't hate Nvidia, it's just that the claim about desktop and mobile displays being in different universes is disgusting. They're trying to sell this feature and it's cool, I'm just puzzled about stuff like that passing as something even close to reality.

But they are very different. Do you know why AMD is requesting a change to the DisplayPort standard?

I think you are spreading misinformation, internally or unintentionally.

Not only has there been a request to change the standard (because it is not capable), display manufactures have agreed that new hardware/standards are required, and AMDs own VP of visual computing all agree that you cant do freesync with out HW and DP changes.

Currently, Desktop and Mobile display technology are very different. Although the panels may be similar, the way they communicate is very different. This has been confirmed, but you have a problem with it? Why? Perhaps you should forget all about the PR stunt at CES and look at the steaming pile of facts that have manifested since then.

 

[Imouto]

Actually DP 1.2a is the current version.

Update/Modification/whatever AMD is planning to do.

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough.

 

[Imouto]

But they are very different. Do you know why AMD is requesting a change to the DisplayPort standard?

Because they liked G-Sync and think that there's a way easier way to implement it.

Currently, Desktop and Mobile display technology are very different. Although the panels may be similar, the way they communicate is very different. This has been confirmed, but you have a problem with it? Why?

http://emerythacks.blogspot.ca/
http://www.overclock.net/t/1389756/custom-screen-31-3600x1600-cost-250

So much different.

 

[96Firebird]

Currently, Desktop and Mobile display technology are very different. Although the panels may be similar, the way they communicate is very different.

Exactly. To say that desktop and mobile displays are similar just shows lack of knowledge.

Mobile displays are built to allow different refresh rates, that is known. Typical laptop displays will run at normal refresh rate (lets say 60Hz) when plugged in, and then clock down to 40Hz when running on battery. That doesn't mean the display can change refresh rates 60 times per second. Nobody really knows if it can or not. Apparently the Toshiba demoed can, but I doubt many others can.