AMD demonstrates Freesync, G-sync equivalent?

Given that G-Sync modules replace the scalers there is some motivation on the scaler vendors side.

LOL, right, scaler vendors are feeling threatened by a very niche technology such as G-Sync. Nice way to spin it :D

As noted above, "Nvidia's intent in building the G-Sync module was to enable this capability and thus to nudge the industry in the right direction [in creating a scaler ASIC with variable refresh capability]". G-Sync is a short-term solution for desktop monitors, NVIDIA knows that, but it is certainly much better than the alternative which is currently "nothing" on the desktop.

On a side note, it is absolutely incredible that it took something like G-Sync to actually get the industry moving in the right direction, considering that these ideas have been talked about and floating around for so many years now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LOL, right, scaler vendors are feeling threatened by a very niche technology such as G-Sync. Nice way to spin it :D
*Some* motivation, probably not a lot, that's right. But as they can likely add support with no significant additional cost for their next versions/revisions of their scaler solutions or maybe even activate support just with a different firmware version in a few cases, why shouldn't they do it for the added value it provides?
 
*Some* motivation, probably not a lot, that's right. But as they can likely add support with no significant additional cost for their next versions/revisions of their scaler solutions or maybe even activate support just with a different firmware version in a few cases, why shouldn't they do it for the added value it provides?

Absolutely, they should work on doing this. But the whole "Free-Sync" marketing slogan is completely foolish IMHO. Things in life rarely ever come for "free". When a scaler asic with variable refresh capability is implemented, most people will need to buy a new monitor AND possibly a new GPU too in order to make use of the technology (it is my understanding that no current GPU has support for DP 1.3 based on what I read at the Anandtech forum).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Absolutely, they should work on doing this. But the whole "Free-Sync" marketing slogan is completely foolish IMHO. Things in life rarely ever come for "free". When a scaler asic with variable refresh capability is implemented, most people will need to buy a new monitor AND possibly a new GPU too in order to make use of the technology (it is my understanding that no current GPU has support for DP 1.3 based on what I read at the Anandtech forum).

At least they won't have to pay for an expensive FPGA module with 768MB of RAM with the extra volume and power that come with it. And compared to the standard price of a new computer, it will be free.
 
At least they won't have to pay for an expensive FPGA module with 768MB of RAM with the extra volume and power that come with it.

That is a straw man argument. At the end of the day, it is not even close to "free" as AMD is trying to [falsely] portray. And who do you think will end up paying the research, design, and implementation cost for this new technology (scaler asic with variable refresh capability)? AMD? :D The cost will be passed on to consumers that buy new monitors that support the new technology.

And compared to the standard price of a new computer, it will be free.

That makes no sense. It will not be free, period.
 
That is a straw man argument. At the end of the day, it is not even close to "free" as AMD is trying to [falsely] portray. And who do you think will end up paying the research, design, and implementation cost for this new technology (scaler asic with variable refresh capability)?
You're making an assumption that the ability isn't already there in from the hardware perspective.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...h-FreeSync-Could-Be-Alternative-NVIDIA-G-Sync

Finally, as a last minute stirring of the pot, I received an email from AMD's Koduri that indicated that there might be some monitors already on the market that could support variable refresh rate TODAY with just a firmware update. This would be possible if a display was shipping with a controller that happened to coincidentally support variable refresh, perhaps in an early stage of development for the upcoming DP 1.3 standard. We are trying to find a list of these monitors so we can talk with them and ask for these necessary changes.
 
And who do you think will end up paying the research, design, and implementation cost for this new technology (scaler asic with variable refresh capability)? AMD? :D The cost will be passed on to consumers that buy new monitors that support the new technology.
Just think about what R&D effort is necessary for a solution which likely requires close to zero effort. What's needed is simply that the scaler does its thing as it would do with the highest refresh rate it supports and then simply does nothing and sits idle during a possibly extended vblank period. Doesn't sound very complicated to me. There is really not more necessary in case of a continuous backlight.
But even in case of a refreshrate locked PWM brightness regulation (which in my opinion is a questionable engineering decision in the first place, but anyway) or backlight strobing there exist some relatively simple solutions (which are probably not available through a firmware update; gsync on that Asus monitor uses a continuous backlight/deactivates backlight strobes, btw.), which were outlined already somewhere in the gsync thread.
 
You're making an assumption that the ability isn't already there in from the hardware perspective.

And you're making the assumption that the ability is already there and ready on a broad scale from a hardware perspective. AMD makes it sound like this is a trivial and quick thing to implement across the board, when the reality is likely to be far different than that. And like I said earlier, most people will need to purchase a new monitor for this (and possibly a new GPU too), so it is not really "free" at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That is a straw man argument. At the end of the day, it is not even close to "free" as AMD is trying to [falsely] portray. And who do you think will end up paying the research, design, and implementation cost for this new technology (scaler asic with variable refresh capability)? AMD? :D The cost will be passed on to consumers that buy new monitors that support the new technology.

Haha, and the cost hasn't been passed through on to the consumers by Nvidia? A big cost I would add, compared to a smaller cost of just a new monitor with the prescribed specification.

Asus estimates that the VG248QE, which normally runs about $280, will go for $400 with a G-Sync kit built-in.

The other problem that I've read with G-Sync is that it can't work on multiple monitor configurations. That's a big problem to people with dual or triple monitors. Anyone care to elaborate about this as I would think a person who has two G-Sync enabled monitors would be able to use the functionality, however I've read that it's not possible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What is the advantage to doing it on the host?
I could think of some things. For example to relieve the host system of the "burden" of frame distribution - with all the implications you could think of. ;)
 
Haha, and the cost hasn't been passed through on to the consumers by Nvidia?

Obviously not... In that case, you would purchase a product, which is not an hidden cost :p

On the other way around, does NVIDIA support natively that feat on its Kepler GPUs? (I have a NB with it, I'm interested)
 
I could think of some things. For example to relieve the host system of the "burden" of frame distribution - with all the implications you could think of. ;)
First it's good you've put "burden" in quotation marks as it is not much of burden from a performance point of view. And second, maybe one should keep in mind that a good frame pacing method should have means of a feedback to the engine and therefore the actual game time, because otherwise you can still get judder effects. Now think, where sich a frame pacing method would be optimally done ;). In the ideal case, this would be done by the game engine itself in my opinion.
 
The other problem that I've read with G-Sync is that it can't work on multiple monitor configurations. That's a big problem to people with dual or triple monitors. Anyone care to elaborate about this as I would think a person who has two G-Sync enabled monitors would be able to use the functionality, however I've read that it's not possible.

I don't see why it wouldn't work as long as your have as many cards as displays.

Albeit, it is being worked on.
SKYMTL said:
There are some additional limitations as well. While it can be used with an SLI system, G-SYNC can’t operate in Windowed Mode, doesn’t currently support NVIDIA’s Surround multi monitor technology and will only be available through a DisplayPort interface. Don’t expect any external G-SYNC adapters either since existing monitor scalers can’t be modified to work with the technology, nor can they be bypassed via an external hub. As you might expect, the technology is only compatible with NVIDIA’s Kepler-based cards but due to the its unique nature, I’m sure we can all understand why this needs to be held close to their chests.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/64586-week-nvidias-g-sync-monitor.html
 
Well then spell it out and don't be so vague about it, and stop calling it "free" ;)

How does AMD benefit financial from the technology? If they are giving the solution away, how is it not free?

If I set up a stand on my side walk with a "free lemonade" sign and gave away lemonade, how am I being untruthful just because you got in your car, drove to my street and incurred a cost from your use of fuel.
 
How does AMD benefit financial from the technology? If they are giving the solution away, how is it not free?

If I set up a stand on my side walk with a "free lemonade" sign and gave away lemonade, how am I being untruthful just because you got in your car, drove to my street and incurred a cost from your use of fuel.

How AMD benefit isn't the point, it's how it's "free" for the consumer that is in question.

What monitor do you use out of interest? I hope for your sake it gets some magically free upgrade to the wonderful world of Freesync, otherwise... like AMD, I'm all for people do the work for me and handing out freebies.

Ice please. :D
 
How does AMD benefit financial from the technology? If they are giving the solution away, how is it not free?

If I set up a stand on my side walk with a "free lemonade" sign and gave away lemonade, how am I being untruthful just because you got in your car, drove to my street and incurred a cost from your use of fuel.

You are being untruthful because someone drive for half an hour only to found that you dont really gave away lemonade. What you actually do is only telling him how to make a lemonade and pointing out at some store where he might purchase lemons -- while fully knowing that store doesn't have lemons to sell yet and don't really know when they will, if at all.
 
You are being untruthful because someone drive for half an hour only to found that you dont really gave away lemonade. What you actually do is only telling him how to make a lemonade and pointing out at some store where he might purchase lemons -- while fully knowing that store doesn't have lemons to sell yet and don't really know when they will, if at all.

Did you miss Dave saying that there are indeed lemons at the store?
 
Back
Top