Acer Announces $499 Price Tag For XG270HU FreeSync Monitor

[obababoy]

I don't own a Gsync capable card nor a monitor with it but from what I have seen of freesync so far I don't even know why they have bothered to release it, the stutter even on their own software demo which look like it's hardly demanding is terrible, I would much prefer to use vsync then this rubbish, AMD talked the talk when NVIDIA released GSYNC but they can not walk the walk and I believe they only released info about their development of freesync at the time to impact on NVIDIA's sales of GSYNC monitors even though they new it was superior in every way, knowing that freesync could never compare.

Longest sentence ever! ^^

Are there any nVidia fans STILL defending the 100% proprietary G-Sync (this from as a long time nVidia buyer)? There is zero reason nVidia won't support FreeSync other than that it cannablises the sales of their technology. Unless you're also a shareholder of nVidia, I utterly fail to see how nVidia's customers can staunchly support nVidia needlessly gouging them like this. Are nVidia GPUs being bundled with Vaseline and a stick to bite down on yet?

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Displays/AMD-FreeSync-First-Impressions-and-Technical-Discussion/Gaming-Experience-FreeSync-
Yes, because ghosting etc.
"For its part, AMD says that ghosting is an issue it is hoping to lessen on FreeSync monitors by helping partners pick the right components (Tcon, scalars, etc.) and to drive a “fast evolution” in this area."

Ok, so they know about the problem, but the jury is still out on if it can be fixed or not. For now though:
"My time with today’s version of FreeSync definitely show it as a step in the right direction but I think it is far from perfect. It’s fair to assume that after telling me FreeSync would be sent to reviewers as far back as September of last year, AMD found that getting display technologies just right is a much more difficult undertaking than originally expected. They have gotten a lot right: no upfront module costs for monitor vendors, better monitor feature support, wide vendor support and lower prices than currently selling G-Sync options. But there is room for improvement: ghosting concerns, improving the transition experience between VRR windows and non-VRR frame rates and figuring out a way to enable tear-free and stutter-free gaming under the minimum variable refresh rate."

"FreeSync is doing the right things and is headed in the right direction, but it can’t claim to offer the same experience as G-Sync. Yet."

Until they get it right, Gsync WORKS. IF you think, "good enough" is ok, feel free to purchase something they need to still fix 😉 Oops, many things they need to fix 😉 I'll always take proprietary if it is BETTER. IE, Cuda vs. OpenCL. When proprietary sucks, I'll pass. For me, I'm waiting for a die shrink from both sides before any decision is made on GPU, so the same can be said of the monitors and I have plenty of time to see who wins, if prices drop etc.

Having said that, My i7-4790+board arrives tomorrow, so AMD lost me there. I can no longer wait on my paltry cpu. They still have a shot at my gpu/monitor combo but good enough is not acceptable. I want the best or at least no discernible difference between them. PERIOD. By that I mean I need lowest heat (live in AZ), great watts/perf. AMD would need to fix things on freesync side or all things being equal I go NV with Gsync since it is the better option (currently, and until proven otherwise). I kind of suspected there were problems which is why no reviewers were running games until the monitor hit. It's pretty clear so far, the gsync module has a purpose and NV commented it's the fine tuning in there that kills ghosting etc. Clearly not easy to fix everything, as even NV has issues on a per monitor basis or we'd have dozens. They also had trouble with some rev of the silicon before, so maybe we'll start seeing more gsync monitors now that that is supposedly fixed. No need for NV to support Freesync until AMD can prove it works as good as gsync. They already made gsync and it works, so why waste money that AMD is spending now if they never get it working? That would be pointless.

To any buying now, obviously on AMD's side you're a beta tester they hope to fix later in new monitors, assuming they can actually pick parts that FIX the issues. They can't fix the ones you buy now, as it's parts related. You'll live with the ghosting etc. Best to AVOID these monitors until we see if they can "cherry pick" parts that WORK right.

I don't even know what you are saying...Nvidia is overpriced and locked down and I would much rather support AMD to level the playing field and make our gaming experience better no matter what side you are on. G-sync monitors are a waste of money and freesync is still in infancy but there is at least a better choice and less shady business tactics. What you should do is wait until Gsync is cheaper and freesync improves the minimum refresh range. The ghosting thing is a bunch of crap that PCper loves to make a big deal about because they are heavy Nvidia partners...

 

[obababoy]

Yeah.

Because a 60% price increase for sure would had been totally unreasonable and non-heard off for an IPS + ergonomic stand monitor vs a TN one.

I'm not saying G-sync cost extra. It likely does.

But it's not the same monitor if one remove that one uses G-Sync and the other FreeSync.

^ Agreed. Some would value the IPS at at least a $100 upgrade and the ergonomic stand at anywhere from $25-$50 I'm sure, if not more.

It wouldn't surprise me if the G-SYNC licensing was anywhere from $99-$150.

There is no lic fee. They made that clear. It's a module fee of $40-60 that is it. Anything that happens after that is monitor makers slapping on extra realizing they can sell the best for extra bucks, at least until AMD fixes stuff that Pcper and others have noted.

Oh cause pcper is an unbiased reporter? Why would a standard module fee have a $40-60 range. It would be a flat rate. There is more to the extra fee's than we think and I will NOT support a locked up Nvidia until they make some business changes even if their video cards save $3.60 a year in electricity. Cost/performance still goes to AMD including power consumption. No brainer to someone who wants to play PC games as cheap and powerful as possible and not look at them in a plastic covered ugly red case.

 

[somebodyspecial]

snipped.

Longest sentence ever! ^^

Are there any nVidia fans STILL defending the 100% proprietary G-Sync (this from as a long time nVidia buyer)? There is zero reason nVidia won't support FreeSync other than that it cannablises the sales of their technology. Unless you're also a shareholder of nVidia, I utterly fail to see how nVidia's customers can staunchly support nVidia needlessly gouging them like this. Are nVidia GPUs being bundled with Vaseline and a stick to bite down on yet?

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Displays/AMD-FreeSync-First-Impressions-and-Technical-Discussion/Gaming-Experience-FreeSync-
Yes, because ghosting etc.
"For its part, AMD says that ghosting is an issue it is hoping to lessen on FreeSync monitors by helping partners pick the right components (Tcon, scalars, etc.) and to drive a “fast evolution” in this area."

Ok, so they know about the problem, but the jury is still out on if it can be fixed or not. For now though:
"My time with today’s version of FreeSync definitely show it as a step in the right direction but I think it is far from perfect. It’s fair to assume that after telling me FreeSync would be sent to reviewers as far back as September of last year, AMD found that getting display technologies just right is a much more difficult undertaking than originally expected. They have gotten a lot right: no upfront module costs for monitor vendors, better monitor feature support, wide vendor support and lower prices than currently selling G-Sync options. But there is room for improvement: ghosting concerns, improving the transition experience between VRR windows and non-VRR frame rates and figuring out a way to enable tear-free and stutter-free gaming under the minimum variable refresh rate."

"FreeSync is doing the right things and is headed in the right direction, but it can’t claim to offer the same experience as G-Sync. Yet."

Until they get it right, Gsync WORKS. IF you think, "good enough" is ok, feel free to purchase something they need to still fix 😉 Oops, many things they need to fix 😉 I'll always take proprietary if it is BETTER. IE, Cuda vs. OpenCL. When proprietary sucks, I'll pass. For me, I'm waiting for a die shrink from both sides before any decision is made on GPU, so the same can be said of the monitors and I have plenty of time to see who wins, if prices drop etc.

Having said that, My i7-4790+board arrives tomorrow, so AMD lost me there. I can no longer wait on my paltry cpu. They still have a shot at my gpu/monitor combo but good enough is not acceptable. I want the best or at least no discernible difference between them. PERIOD. By that I mean I need lowest heat (live in AZ), great watts/perf. AMD would need to fix things on freesync side or all things being equal I go NV with Gsync since it is the better option (currently, and until proven otherwise). I kind of suspected there were problems which is why no reviewers were running games until the monitor hit. It's pretty clear so far, the gsync module has a purpose and NV commented it's the fine tuning in there that kills ghosting etc. Clearly not easy to fix everything, as even NV has issues on a per monitor basis or we'd have dozens. They also had trouble with some rev of the silicon before, so maybe we'll start seeing more gsync monitors now that that is supposedly fixed. No need for NV to support Freesync until AMD can prove it works as good as gsync. They already made gsync and it works, so why waste money that AMD is spending now if they never get it working? That would be pointless.

To any buying now, obviously on AMD's side you're a beta tester they hope to fix later in new monitors, assuming they can actually pick parts that FIX the issues. They can't fix the ones you buy now, as it's parts related. You'll live with the ghosting etc. Best to AVOID these monitors until we see if they can "cherry pick" parts that WORK right.

I don't even know what you are saying...Nvidia is overpriced and locked down and I would much rather support AMD to level the playing field and make our gaming experience better no matter what side you are on. G-sync monitors are a waste of money and freesync is still in infancy but there is at least a better choice and less shady business tactics. What you should do is wait until Gsync is cheaper and freesync improves the minimum refresh range. The ghosting thing is a bunch of crap that PCper loves to make a big deal about because they are heavy Nvidia partners...

Nvidia only charges $40-60 for the module, everything after that is monitor makers making as much as the market will bear. Understand? You are blaming them for what monitor makers are charging. As you see above AMD still has a chance to get me, but they have to match or beat NV, I won't buy 2nd rate stuff.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2015/03/23/nvidia-explains-why-their-g-sync-display-tech-is-superior-to-amds-freesync/?utm_campaign=yahootix&partner=yahootix
Forbes article interview with NV Gsync guy Tom Petersen, where he explains why they're better and how pricing is NOT set by them. They've raised the ROG SWIFT to $779 now at newegg at least today's price. Tom is correct. Newegg themselves have a price hike system, where if a product is being pounded, it ups the price $10-15 etc. I have that happen on my last xeons as people realized they could easily hit 3.6 and were the same as the already sold out desktop model.

 

[CraigN]

Nvidia only charges $40-60 for the module, everything after that is monitor makers making as much as the market will bear. Understand? You are blaming them for what monitor makers are charging. As you see above AMD still has a chance to get me, but they have to match or beat NV, I won't buy 2nd rate stuff.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2015/03/23/nvidia-explains-why-their-g-sync-display-tech-is-superior-to-amds-freesync/?utm_campaign=yahootix&partner=yahootix
Forbes article interview with NV Gsync guy Tom Petersen, where he explains why they're better and how pricing is NOT set by them. They've raised the ROG SWIFT to $779 now at newegg at least today's price. Tom is correct. Newegg themselves have a price hike system, where if a product is being pounded, it ups the price $10-15 etc. I have that happen on my last xeons as people realized they could easily hit 3.6 and were the same as the already sold out desktop model.

*Ahem*

They didn't "raise" the price to $779. It launched at $799. If it dropped to $749, then it got adjusted up to $779 at some point, but the monitor *launched* at $799.

Source: I own an ROG Swift, bought at launch.

 

[somebodyspecial]

Yeah.

Because a 60% price increase for sure would had been totally unreasonable and non-heard off for an IPS + ergonomic stand monitor vs a TN one.

I'm not saying G-sync cost extra. It likely does.

But it's not the same monitor if one remove that one uses G-Sync and the other FreeSync.

^ Agreed. Some would value the IPS at at least a $100 upgrade and the ergonomic stand at anywhere from $25-$50 I'm sure, if not more.

It wouldn't surprise me if the G-SYNC licensing was anywhere from $99-$150.

There is no lic fee. They made that clear. It's a module fee of $40-60 that is it. Anything that happens after that is monitor makers slapping on extra realizing they can sell the best for extra bucks, at least until AMD fixes stuff that Pcper and others have noted.

Oh cause pcper is an unbiased reporter? Why would a standard module fee have a $40-60 range. It would be a flat rate. There is more to the extra fee's than we think and I will NOT support a locked up Nvidia until they make some business changes even if their video cards save $3.60 a year in electricity. Cost/performance still goes to AMD including power consumption. No brainer to someone who wants to play PC games as cheap and powerful as possible and not look at them in a plastic covered ugly red case.

Wrong, there is a range that depends on how many you buy as an OEM. When I had a PC business I had the same issues. I might be standing in line at my distributor with 8 other shops, noticing the pricing on the big guy was far less than me, and he had preferential treatment on RMA's. My rep even complained about it, but said they could do nothing about the MOUNTAIN of motherboards those jerks RMA's (fully functioning, just hiring stupid kids who didn't know how to build a PC) but that they couldn't stop them because they were their #1 buyer. Intel sell's in lots of 1000, etc. If you're buying less than that you don't get the special deals. Everyone does this. Google paid $21-23 for tegra in the first nexus 7, where MS (bought less) paid ~23-25 for the same chip for surface rt. You're calling PCper liars? jeez...

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/review-amd-freesync-is-a-credible-threat-to-g-sync/1100-6426125/
Gamespot liars too?
"Nvidia's solution was to build the scaler hardware and sell it directly to monitor makers, with the required G-Sync module adding around $60 to the cost."

 

[obababoy]

Not going to add the quotes this time haha. Anyways I am not calling them liars but they capitalize on faults in AMD and spend time mitigating faults with Nvidia. I love PCper and watch all of their stuff but I have learned to understand them in this way. Nvidia just erks me the wrong way. My last Nvidia card was the GTX460 and then SLI, and they still work.
The problem is the company is so interested in their branding and pushing proprietary that it pushes people like me away. Same reason I don't deal with anything Apple unless I am working on breaking it apart here at work. If Nvidia were to blow away the price/performance I would MAYBE switch over but for now I fully intend to stick with AMD for a while and reap the benefits.

 

[somebodyspecial]

Nvidia only charges $40-60 for the module, everything after that is monitor makers making as much as the market will bear. Understand? You are blaming them for what monitor makers are charging. As you see above AMD still has a chance to get me, but they have to match or beat NV, I won't buy 2nd rate stuff.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2015/03/23/nvidia-explains-why-their-g-sync-display-tech-is-superior-to-amds-freesync/?utm_campaign=yahootix&partner=yahootix
Forbes article interview with NV Gsync guy Tom Petersen, where he explains why they're better and how pricing is NOT set by them. They've raised the ROG SWIFT to $779 now at newegg at least today's price. Tom is correct. Newegg themselves have a price hike system, where if a product is being pounded, it ups the price $10-15 etc. I have that happen on my last xeons as people realized they could easily hit 3.6 and were the same as the already sold out desktop model.

*Ahem*

They didn't "raise" the price to $779. It launched at $799. If it dropped to $749, then it got adjusted up to $779 at some point, but the monitor *launched* at $799.

Source: I own an ROG Swift, bought at launch.

You call it adjusted up, I call it raised....Whatever the two end the same. Price went up from $749, just like I said. The point is the price has nothing to do with NV, and as noted they are modifying it based on what they market will bear. I never said they raised above launch price. I was talking vs. the $749 the article states it was currently going for when it was written. Peterson's point is they're charging what they think they can get, which is why AMD is cheaper. It is seen as not as good vs. gsync, and PCper etc showed why. It looks like NV has no reason to support adaptive sync yet, and worse, no reason for retail (not NV, but I mean retail) to drop their gsync pricing.

 

[Ninjawithagun]

Just pre-ordered mine - should be sittng on my desk by end of next week!

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009742

 

[CraigN]

Just pre-ordered mine - should be sittng on my desk by end of next week!

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009742

Do please let us know what you think! I would love to hear about it.

 

[Johan Kryger Haglert]

Freesync one may be cheaper but since Freesync one is TN and G-sync one is "IPS" one can't attribute the price difference to the technology used alone.

With no sync solution at all the "IPS" one would be expected to cost more.

 

[CraigN]

The ASUS FreeSync one that just came out is IPS. Hopefully we'll see a review on that one soon.