I was asking for actual examples because I've played a ton of games on Freesync and have never noticed any issues with animation and jitter. I've never seen it even mentioned besides your comment.
Essentially all 3D PC games work like this. It is task of the engine running on the CPU to determine the time of the next frame to be displayed. Based on this the next world space and view space transforms are calculated. After this the GPU takes over. However, as i said, it is just a prediction typically done based on the frame interval of the last frames.
You can imagine, that given how Freesync works, the frame is almost never precisely displayed at the intended time resulting in jitter.
Thats the beauty of Vsync. Assuming the the GPU is always fast enough, the frame interval precisely matches the prediction resulting in a jitter free experience. Of course, i give you that, in case the time it takes to render a frame is larger than the display refresh interval then VSync jitter is much larger than Freesync jitter.
Some minor amount of tearing is expected even with LFC.LFC should remove all tearing. Sounds like its not working.
Do you have an OSD for the monitor display hz? You'll see the hz double up, so if your game is @ 20fps the monitor will display 40hz and thus be tear free. You'll get the same frame twice which isn't ideal, but it should never tear. Same thing happens with GSync. Neither should ever tear.
Some minor amount of tearing is expected even with LFC.
https://www.amd.com/Documents/freesync-lfc.pdf
No Vsync, below min FPS, LFC enabled says REDUCED tearing.
If I enable vsync then it completely removes it.
Still more than month away.Vega is not close at all.I really want to see some legit leaks of this thing. Given how close we are to launch, I'd have hoped to see something on Vega.
Still more than month away.Vega is not close at all.
Launch will be at computex 2017 probably.
30.5-3.6
Launch will be at computex 2017 probably.
Well hopefully since the design is for higher clocks and we already see polaris factory OC hitting 1450 that Vega will be a good bit higher than that.
Just as I was posting this I saw TPU updated their charts with a Boost Bios for the Nitro+
GODDAMN!!!! That power consumption to performance ratio. The Boost Bios puts it eating more power than a GTX 1080 Ti and only gains it 2% more performance! WTH are they thinking?
Vega had better be something special. If these 36 CUs running around 1.4GHz are going over 200W, then the 64 NCUs rumoured to run over 1.5GHz really have to have serious improvements to hit 225W (not that I trust TDP).
But things like these RX 580 200w+ is why I am skeptical of Vega. We expect Vega NCUs to be so good that they have nearly double the shaders, running higher, using barely more power consumption, and also have "IPC" improvements? I want to believe.
Vega had better be something special. If these 36 CUs running around 1.4GHz are going over 200W, then the 64 NCUs rumoured to run over 1.5GHz really have to have serious improvements to hit 225W (not that I trust TDP).
But things like these RX 580 200w+ is why I am skeptical of Vega. We expect Vega NCUs to be so good that they have nearly double the shaders, running higher, using barely more power consumption, and also have "IPC" improvements?
I want to believe.
Will AMD fix multi-monitor with Vega (clocks)?
Idle power consumption of my PC with a Fury with one monitor connected is 59W. With a second monitor connected it is 60W. It was equally good with my old 280X, as long as all the connected monitors were DisplayPort, so it's been fixed for years now.Will AMD fix multi-monitor with Vega (clocks)?
Idle power consumption of my PC with a Fury with one monitor connected is 59W. With a second monitor connected it is 60W. It was equally good with my old 280X, as long as all the connected monitors were DisplayPort, so it's been fixed for years now.
Starting with the multi-monitor testing, the results were not what I was expecting. While AMD tells me that this should trigger the new mid-power state, I haven’t been able to successfully trigger it. With matched monitors the RX 580 can go to full idle, just like the RX 480. Otherwise with mismatched monitors, it always goes to 8Gbps, skipping past 4Gbps and never returning. Even with a few different monitors, the results were always the same.
They probably connected the monitors with an old interface instead of DP. Or were you suggesting that my numbers were wrong?
Totally different architecture using a lower power draw memory type.
Polaris =//= Vega
Based on a post from Glo. I don't think Vega will be hitting 1.5 GHz on Air. The fact that Vega will need an AIO to run at 1.5 GHz is kind of bad news - make me think that this clock will be hit with a 'Boost BIOS' like Polaris (and worse perf/watt because of it). I don't think we will see boost clocks above ~ 1.4 GHz. Still, with a major uarch upgrade, I expect Vega to have much better perf/watt than Polaris from significantly better perf/CU and plenty of memory bandwidth (and maybe beyond plenty with HBC - this will be interesting to see).
The best reason for offering an AIO cooling solution with Vega would be to best the 1080Ti, the other could just be because the top clocked GPU is hot enough to fry a steak on it - so I hope the reason is the former.
I think that financially, AMD was lacking the money to do much for Polaris, so all their chips are in on Vega.
Got link?
I was hoping for 1500mhz or higher from Vega.
I will give you guys a funny question.
What if, 687F:C1, 1.2 GHz GPU demoed by AMD, averaging 72(Exactly on par with GTX 1080 Ti) FPS in Doom 4K, Vulkan is not top of the line GPU?
What if there will be 1.5 GHz, water cooled version of the same GPU?