It's not a trademark. You've quoted what it is yourself - "a hardware–software solution".
This can be said about Gsync too then as it uses HDMI standards as we speak.
Variable Refresh Rate topic *spawn*
- Thread starter dskneo
- Start date
- Status
Oh my god.
Its a hardware-software based solution in the sense that for variable refresh rate to work, it requires both hardware and software, using VESA open standards on the hardware front and software on AMD side.
NVIDIA and Intel could never have added support for existing Freesync monitors if the entire solution stack was even slightly proprietary.
You are simply trying to win an argument for the sake of winning. No merit on this discussion.
I'll say it again as you've seem to be incapable of reading: there are no VESA "open standards" in HDMI Freesync.
They don't. They support only VESA adaptive sync through their own proprietary s/w layers - at least Nvidia does with Gsync, Intel seem to be MIA still.
Personal attacks won't get you anywhere. Try reading instead.
Gsync is compatible with VESA adaptive sync signaling now and all GPUs supporting this h/w communication layer are working with Gsync monitors since circa Jan 2019 or so. The Gsync h/w itself is still better than most of what is going into non-Gsync monitors so while it may eventually be phased out so far it's still relevant and have an edge over other options when it comes to quality and new tech (360Hz are all Gsync, 120Hz+ FALDs are all Gsync, etc).
Bondrewd
Veteran
Yes!
That's how iPad Pros always worked FYI.
No explodey the battery life no-no.
(VRR isn't monitor first as a concept at all anyway)
Last edited:
I read, I don't twist meanings. You needed a crutch to support your opinion that freesync is not based on open formats, and you found that HDMI had a version also named "freesync" that was indeed proprietary.
Before you knew that, your first attempt to defend yourself was by accusing Wikipedia of being wrong (!!!). Yes, we read that before you edited .
Nvidia supports every freesync DP monitor ever made and in existence, and it does so because DP Freesync is only a trademark for the open VESA adaptive sync.
Your second attempt to defend yourself, was by attempting to Interpret the software layer each manufacturer must build for compatibility as "proof" for being proprietary! and using semantics to twist the wikipedia quote to mean something else, would imply that every single piece of open source technology in existence no longer qualifies as such due to ALWAYS requiring a software layer on who intends to adopt it.
Deceitful, and laughable.
Last edited:
Yeah, your posts are.
Yes you do.
So are you saying that Freesync isn't based on open formats?
Already explained. You're still not reading.
Nvidia doesn't support every "freesync DP monitor" ever made and in existence, they only support those which are certified by them to be "Gsync Compatible". The rest can be used with Gsync s/w if a user opts to but there is zero guarantee that it will work as intended. Lots of early "Freesync" branded monitors do not work properly with Gsync.
And Freesync is not a trademark - that we have already established from the quote you've posted.
You literally have no idea what you're even arguing about. This much is abundantly clear at this point.
Free Sync and Vesa Adaptive Sync are not the same thing. One simply leverages the other.
AMD wouldn't go through the trouble of distinguishing the difference in the FAQ on their website if they were the same thing.
https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/free-sync-faq
https://community.amd.com/community...t-is-freesync-an-explanation-in-laymans-terms
I think people tend to conflate FreeSync with Adaptive Sync because AMD certified displayport Adaptive-Sync-compatible displays are labeled FreeSync displays.
But port protocols that are industry standards and enable FreeSync are not considered part of FreeSync by AMD
AMD wouldn't go through the trouble of distinguishing the difference in the FAQ on their website if they were the same thing.
https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/free-sync-faq
https://community.amd.com/community...t-is-freesync-an-explanation-in-laymans-terms
I think people tend to conflate FreeSync with Adaptive Sync because AMD certified displayport Adaptive-Sync-compatible displays are labeled FreeSync displays.
But port protocols that are industry standards and enable FreeSync are not considered part of FreeSync by AMD
Last edited:
The PG32UQX is pretty sweet, $3000 price tag notwithstanding. The first mini-LED backlit monitor with like a very solid HDR 1400 implementation. It also happens to be blessed with G-Sync Ultimate certification for whatever it's worth. I'm so tempted but also so not interested in throwing $3K at it. I might finally say goodbye to my PG279Q for a 5K 24:10 mini-LED ultrawide but that's not happening anytime soon.
Asus ROG Swift PG32UQX Review - TFT Central
WhiningKhan
Regular
Yeah it doesn't make any sense at this price. Thus there's also PG32UQ coming, without the FALD, Gsync, and likely without any form of good HDR as a result but at about $1500.
Freesync is not a trademark, it's a software+hardware solution - if you need that being spelled out in full.
...Anyways.
This discussion spawned from the DLSS topic where it was being proposed the unlikelihood of up-sampling techniques converging on an universal technique in a world where DLSS exists. I gave the Gsync/Freesync example as an open-source solution becoming the standard over a closed box solution.
The dismantling of the definitions of "trademarks" and "open-source" to justify a point is an amusing perspective, but its just arguing for arguing's sake. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny of facts truth or common sense.
This discussion spawned from the DLSS topic where it was being proposed the unlikelihood of up-sampling techniques converging on an universal technique in a world where DLSS exists. I gave the Gsync/Freesync example as an open-source solution becoming the standard over a closed box solution.
The dismantling of the definitions of "trademarks" and "open-source" to justify a point is an amusing perspective, but its just arguing for arguing's sake. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny of facts truth or common sense.
And to that I've replied that neither Gsync nor Freesync are in any way or form "open source solutions" and neither of them has become "the standard". Both have been superseded by industrial standards - VESA AS in Gsync's case and HDMI VRR in Freesync's case.
If we apply the same logic to resolution reconstruction tech it would be far more likely that both DLSS and FSR will eventually be superseded by crossplatform solutions from Microsoft, Epic, Unity, etc.
- Status