Freesync is proprietary to AMD so only they will be supporting it. So that means less than 18% if you are counting integrated. Although it will be mostly useless for integrated.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Why won't NVIDIA support adaptive sync?
- Thread starter M76
- Start date
Freesync is proprietary to AMD so only they will be supporting it. So that means less than 18% if you are counting integrated. Although it will be mostly useless for integrated.
Who cares if its proprietary. If Intel will support adaptive sync with iSync or whatever they want to name it, by default it will support the same monitors as Freesync and vice versa.
Criticalhitkoala
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2015
- Messages
- 1,986
I hate the fact that companies do like pushing proprietary stuff on the masses, and it's what made me avoid Sony for so long (Blue Ray, UMD, Beta, Memory Stick, etc) but I was a hypocrit and did go Gsync over Freesync because honestly right now it just seems like Nvidia cards were better along with Gsync being better.
It was long ago where I cared about saving money, but now I don't mind spending a hundred, or even a thousand more just because well why not. I recognize the equipment I bought now might not be the best in 1 year, or hell in 6 months, but I can tell you now they've already been put through the gauntlet and have entertained me for hours and days on end already. It was worth the price of admission and Gsync has made gaming great.
I do hope the companies do figure a solution one day, or something becomes the standard, but in all reality when that happens than another company is going to come up with another proprietary idea that will be copied by a competitor and we are back to square one.
It was long ago where I cared about saving money, but now I don't mind spending a hundred, or even a thousand more just because well why not. I recognize the equipment I bought now might not be the best in 1 year, or hell in 6 months, but I can tell you now they've already been put through the gauntlet and have entertained me for hours and days on end already. It was worth the price of admission and Gsync has made gaming great.
I do hope the companies do figure a solution one day, or something becomes the standard, but in all reality when that happens than another company is going to come up with another proprietary idea that will be copied by a competitor and we are back to square one.
jbltecnicspro
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2006
- Messages
- 9,589
Are you agreeing with me or being sarcastic? Sorry - my internet forum speak is a little dull this late at night.
They backed it, but none of their integrated GPUs actually support it yet. So yep still only 18%.
I do wish Nvidia would just support the open standard in this case though. I'd love to buy a high refresh display with adaptive refresh rates, but there is no way I'm paying the $200-300 Gsync price premium over comparable non-Gsync monitors
as usual, you dont know what you are talking about.
Freesync is AMDs implementation of Adaptive-Sync.
Anyone can use it, its open, and free
hense freesync.
If you want a pretty sticker, sure, do what AMD wants.
if not, whatever.
it makes no diference,
Its 100% free and 100% compatible.
AND 100% freesync compatible.
Thats right Chuckles, if you make an A-sync monitor, it 100% compatible with Freesync...
Last edited:
jbltecnicspro
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2006
- Messages
- 9,589
It is? So if I don't have a "Freesync" monitor but it does support a-sync, then I won't require any special driver or anything to make it work on my AMD card? Serious question.
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
It's a matter of time probably.
If I were at Nvidia I'd:
- add a-sync support capability to g-sync module but not enable it yet
- wait till g-sync module doesn't add more than 50$ to price of monitor
- make sure that g-sync module enables additional features when used with Nvidia cards (they seem to be on track with this with all those overclocked displays)
Only then add a-sync support to their cards
If I were at Nvidia I'd:
- add a-sync support capability to g-sync module but not enable it yet
- wait till g-sync module doesn't add more than 50$ to price of monitor
- make sure that g-sync module enables additional features when used with Nvidia cards (they seem to be on track with this with all those overclocked displays)
Only then add a-sync support to their cards
If you have a card that is Freesync capable then any monitor that uses the DP1.2a standard will work with Freesync. It doesn't require the Freesync branding.
Freesync is 100% proprietary.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,079
So what? A-sync isn't, and freesync works on a-sync monitors.
nVidia mobile GSync is based on adaptive sync (because the gsync module used too much power for a laptop). Since they use the same chips in mobile as on the desktop, there's no technical reason for them to not do so. That said, unless the monitor makers revolt over the premium they have to pay for the gsync module; or adaptive sync becomes a standard feature in commodity monitors I don't see nVidia rushing to add support for adaptive sync on the desktop either.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9303/nvidia-launches-mobile-gsync
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9303/nvidia-launches-mobile-gsync
Intel did NOT back Freesync.
Intel has advised they will support ADAPTIVE Sync. A lot of tech sites erroneously reported it as Freesync. The original article they based it from, however, explicitly states Adaptive Sync.
http://techreport.com/news/28865/intel-plans-to-support-vesa-adaptive-sync-displays
It remains to be seen how future iGPU iterations employ the tech - it could be very well through Intel's own solution they devise, as they compete with AMD's APUs.
If you want to talk major manufacturer adoption - Dell's first variable refresh rate monitor will be G-Sync - the S2716DG. That isn't a particularly good sign for AMD.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Thread title says Async ??
defaultluser
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2006
- Messages
- 14,398
Read the entire article. Nvidia mobile g sync requires the display to support panel self refresh. This makes it easy to support frame rates below thae panel minimum refresh.
Psr adds additional cost to a panel (less than g sync module), so it won't be available on just any old panel. AMD freesync does not support psr, and thus is limited to the minimum panel refresh rate.
next time research before you complain
Richthofen
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2005
- Messages
- 134
Well again Intel just said they will probably support Adaptive Sync in the Future which is not Freesync. Furthermore this is pretty uninteresting for Gamers as Gamers either choose an AMD or Nvidia discrete GPU add in card. And currently arround 80% of that is Nvidia based. So the fact remains that the number of monitors or some general GPU market share numbers including IGPs not used by gamers is completely irrelevant here.
My point simply remains. Nvidia currently controls the vast majority of the gaming market and the timing is good for them to continue creating their own ecosystem. It's not about earning money with G-Sync now. Its about making sure that their customer base will get here and there some extras compared to the competition and of course making sure that they will remain Nvidia customers.
The timing is good. AMD simply has its business currently completely fucked up and bleeds money. As someone interesting in the business side of things i highly recommend Nvidia to even more invest into stuff like G-Sync, Gameworks, Shield etc.
FFS people! Freesync = Async! Freesync is basically just a fancy name AMD slapped on top of it and on the monitors that are AMD "approved", but any Adaptive Sync monitor is compatible with Freesync cards and whenever Intel releases an Async compatible chip they will be compatible with Freesync monitors. Unless something has changed lately this is how it goes.
If Adaptive Sync and Freesync were absolutely identical, there would be no reason for the Freesync moniker to begin with. One would imagine AMD has done some tweaking to the open standard to necessitate a change in language.
Have we seen any explicitly labeled Adaptive-Sync monitors that are supported by AMD hardware? Why is it AMD would need to certify a monitor for Freesync use if it adheres to the standard?
Have we seen any explicitly labeled Adaptive-Sync monitors that are supported by AMD hardware? Why is it AMD would need to certify a monitor for Freesync use if it adheres to the standard?
Other than Nvidia does support DP Adaptive Sync in laptops...
1) Because there's not much pressure to abandon G-Sync. It's currently the superior product compared to DP AS.
2) Because the price of adding G-Sync to monitors can be significantly lowered if necessary.
3) Because it's not a mainstream feature users are demanding. Users who want it are willing to pay a premium at a high enough volume that G-Sync monitor prices don't need to be reduced. IOW, G-Sync monitor makers are offering a non-commoditized product and can enjoy a higher profit margin.
4) Because by not supporting DP AS, Nvidia deprives AMD of the benefits of much higher scale to widen the price difference between DP AS compatible and G-Sync compatible displays. Plus it would probably hurt the manufacturers who currently sell G-Sync monitors.
1) Because there's not much pressure to abandon G-Sync. It's currently the superior product compared to DP AS.
2) Because the price of adding G-Sync to monitors can be significantly lowered if necessary.
3) Because it's not a mainstream feature users are demanding. Users who want it are willing to pay a premium at a high enough volume that G-Sync monitor prices don't need to be reduced. IOW, G-Sync monitor makers are offering a non-commoditized product and can enjoy a higher profit margin.
4) Because by not supporting DP AS, Nvidia deprives AMD of the benefits of much higher scale to widen the price difference between DP AS compatible and G-Sync compatible displays. Plus it would probably hurt the manufacturers who currently sell G-Sync monitors.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
I wouldnt consider buying a monitor that is tied to one gfx card mfr.
Both sides can suck it.
Both sides can suck it.
It makes sense to sell a monitor that 82% of the current market support.
AMD has been talking about moving away from the PC market, so there is very little incentive to really push their "solution".
My monitor was never marketed with freesync by anyone at first. Even in the listings on Amazon and eBay it didn't mention freesync. I was watching it since maybe june, and it had already been out for a while. A few weeks later oc.net posted you can use freesync with a firmware update. Mine came with it out the box and now freesync is actually listed as a feature for the monitor now. Pretty cool if you ask me considering I paid under $1k. Nvidia won't have anything like it anytime soon and if so not for anything near what I paid (and I'll gladly eat those words if they do). At the end of the day they both do the same thing. I'm sure gsync is a little better but they don't have enough monitors and they charge more. I keep saying it because dreams but I truly hope there will be an nvidia hack when freesync hdmi comes
I would gladly pay $2k for the same monitor I have now with gsync and proper rma/warranty support. That 21:9 gsync IPS 1440 curved monitor that's coming out (out now?) will cost in the range of $1200-$1400. I watched that monitor since February before deciding to go 4k. Came from 23.5" 1080p surround and 32" 1440p. As far as I'm concerned got a better monitor for cheaper only difference being gsync.
Last edited:
Amd doesn't need to certify anything. Korean freesync monitors are a perfect example of this
Yup, like Nvidia will be getting your money when it changes to ASync.
Beh.
How is it much better? Because I say so doesn't count.
ManofGod
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2007
- Messages
- 12,880
SImple, it does not make them money and that is all that matters.
Some companies like to pay for things like employees, R&D, marketing, etc.
Other companies (AMD) like to get rid of those things and reward their executives instead.
ManofGod
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2007
- Messages
- 12,880
I assume that means you have a g sync monitor with the most expensive Nvidia cards available, right? After all, have to support those Nvidia employees.
I buy whatever works for me. I don't use political reasons to buy computer parts.
AMD just doesn't work for shit these days, so I don't buy their crap. There was a time when I bought a lot of stuff from AMD, but that was a long time ago.
Currently AMD is a year or 2 behind Intel and NVIDIA, so I notice they are using a lot of viral marketing to spread BS about their products to try and get whatever money they can. It's sad really. They used to be a really good company.
Criticalhitkoala
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2015
- Messages
- 1,986
Isn't async limited to a smaller hertz range? Where as gsync isn't?
Also I believe gsync chips are tuned per monitor for optimum performance
No. Freesync can do 9-240 Hz, the problem is that no monitor can do that. The way each technology handles lower than the monitor's range fps is where Gsync is better, as if it goes below its limit it doubles each frame. Freesync doesn't do this, yet.
Also, as Linus has shown, Freesync has less input lag than Gsync, even though not by much.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzHxhjcE0eQ
That's not true. The OD issue has been fixed. If you should happen to have one of the original ones that were effected check on an RMA. It also wasn't a Freesync issue. Not all models had the problem.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,079
1. If g-sync is really so superior as fanboys claim, then also supporting adaptive sync wouldn't mean abandoning g-sync
2. That won't make me replace my monitor. Why would I buy another monitor with the same features that I already have?
3. I already paid for async, why would I pay premium to another company offering the same thing?
4. I can't make sense of this sentence: "Nvidia deprives AMD of the benefits of much higher scale to widen the price difference between DP AS compatible and G-Sync compatible displays." What are the benefits of "much higher scale"? And why is a large price difference between g-sync and a-sync displays a problem for AMD?
Read the entire article. Nvidia mobile g sync requires the display to support panel self refresh. This makes it easy to support frame rates below thae panel minimum refresh.
Psr adds additional cost to a panel (less than g sync module), so it won't be available on just any old panel. AMD freesync does not support psr, and thus is limited to the minimum panel refresh rate.
next time research before you complain
LOL you really don't understand it either. You realise that eDP standard specification requires panel self refresh and it was introduced in 2011 in eDP 1.3.
AMD already support this. They have supported it for years because they have had to build their APU's to meet this requirement. It's the reason why all GCN APU's (even GCN1.0 APUs) have full support for freesync but GCN 1.0 desktop cards don't.
Intel mobile parts that have eDP 1.3 or later also have full support for panel self refresh.
All Nvidia are doing are using the specification that exists already. And it's basically Adaptive sync screen connected to timing controller and framebuffer on a GPU.
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
That's great but why I can buy g-sync laptops today and nothing with freesync exists ? I don't remember even seeing single annoucement.