Are FreeSync TVs On The Way?

Status
Not open for further replies.

radon_antila

Distinguished
Sep 29, 2011
19
0
18,510
0
"Are consoles about to get FreeSync?"

I wouldn't be surprised.

With AMD locking down this console generation, next year's Xbox Scorpio (which is touted to be essentially a console with VR-ready gaming PC specs at a gaming PC price) would likely NEED a FreeSync TV in order to give both mainstream and VR console gamers the experience of gaming PC framerates their machines have otherwise been unable to achieve thus far.

Now, while the market that awaits home-console VR (and thus, resolutions of 2K and up) might be small, there is a sizable population of console gamers that just want 1080p at 60fps, which is an experience an Xbox Scorpio paired with a FreeSync TV might actually be able to give them.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Since FreeSync is nothing more than AMD's marketing name for "certified compatible" Adaptive Sync displays, I suspect that a growing number of display manufacturers will be skipping any mention of FreeSync or AMD from new displays to cut out licensing costs.

With Adaptive Sync being standard in scalers intended for use with DP1.3 or newer, it won't be distinctive enough to be worth mentioning for much longer, especially on displays/TVs that aren't targeted specifically at gamers.
 

dstarr3

Honorable
Mar 18, 2014
1,527
0
11,960
52
Since the average TV owner doesn't give a shit about framerate, I doubt it. Console users are only a small subset of all TV owners, and console users that understand or care about framerate are an even smaller subset of that.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

Adaptive Sync (the essential functional part of FreeSync) and DisplayPort are as 'free' as VESA membership is and that is the only thing display manufacturers need to implement.

Those who want to use AMD's FreeSync brand have to put up with AMD's branding requirements on top of the regular VESA fees.

 

rush21hit

Honorable
Mar 5, 2012
580
0
11,160
81
@everyone above:
And then there's people like me that consider the thought of buying some big screen TV for occasional PC display if necessary or kinda want to or just because. And hoping for as cheap as it gets coz I'm a poorfag.
 

none12345

Distinguished
Apr 27, 2013
431
2
18,785
0
I just want adaptive sync to be standard in all monitors/tvs. I hate the gsync/freesync split that plagues the current market. Since freesync just uses the adaptive sync standard and it doesnt require another 100 worth of hardware, just use it already, drop gsync and be done with it.

I really dont care if even gynsc becomes the standard, if nvidia makes it open, so we dont have to jack up the cost of monitors to use the tech. Or if they were to combine the best of gsync into the vesa standard adaptive sync, call it whatever, and just make that the standard.

I just want a standard! And im looking at you nvidia, time to embrace the rest of the industry and stop trying to make adpative sync a cash cow.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

It already is, as far as DP1.3 and above are concerned.

With Nvidia commanding an ~80% market share in aftermarket GPUs with no shortage high-end enthusiast fans, it can afford to dictate what its customers can and cannot do.
 

TJ Hooker

Champion
Ambassador

AMD explicitly stated that there are no royalties or licensing costs associated with Freesync.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

On the hardware side, AMD has no authority to charge anything for Adaptive Sync since that is part of VESA's DP standard.

On the marketing side, I doubt that use of the FreeSync brand is completely free of obligations, monetary or otherwise - otherwise there would be no point in confusing people with "FreeSync" instead of promoting the generic Adaptive Sync standard.
 
HDTV is great with Freesync but ONLY if it properly supports the full range. The max vs min ratio must be 2.5X or higher.

30Hz to 75Hz for example.

Otherwise it does not work below 30FPS which is going to be a HUGE deal since a lot of them drop below 30FPS.
 

I don't believe that's accurate. The FreeSync label has "AMD" on it in larger text than "FreeSync". Every single display product posted with a Freesync logo, or with "AMD Freesync" in the feature list is free advertising for AMD. They want that logo and "feature" on as many products as they can.
 

coolitic

Distinguished
May 10, 2012
680
11
19,015
5
Freesync is not open-source, so why is this moronic author labeling it as such? I doubt it was accidental. Also, entrance to VESA isn't free, and only people who are part of VESA are allowed to make Freesync displays.
 

falchard

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2008
2,360
0
19,790
4


64%, and this is for consoles. nVidia has 0% market share for console consumers. So it really doesn't matter what they want.
 
I'm more interested in the technical hurdle. FreeSync for gaming is only supported on GCN 1.1 cards and greater, which excludes older GCN 1.0 cards like 7850 and 7870 - which are usually likened to the PS4 GPU.

If indeed the stock PS4 (and XBOne?) have GCN 1.0 GPUs, are AMD/Sony/MS actually going to be able to get FreeSync working on them? Or will this be limited to the newer console refreshes? There are huge potential benefits for console gaming (and AMD) if they get can get it working on their original hardware, but that seems like a big ask to me.

Also, just as an aside, I wish AMD had incorporated the min and max refresh rate of the display into bottom of the logo and required products using the label to list them, or at least required the min/max to be clearly labelled nearby. Even something like additional Freesync "Gold" or "Platinum" labels/branding for displays with higher refresh-rate ranges. This would have provided incentives from a marketing/labelling perspective for displays to actually implement worthwhile refresh rate ranges. The 40-60hz freesync displays are pretty pointless IMHO, whereas a 30-144hz offers an entirely different experience.

At the moment any display with a next-to-pointlessly tiny refresh rate range can slap a "FreeSync" label on the product and they're good to go. It seems like half the models on Newegg don't even list the min/max hz in the specs list at all and you have to go hunting for specs elsewhere. This really hurts FreeSync as a brand IMHO, because you need to do your research if you don't want to get caught out. An uninformed shopper buying a GSync display, on the other hand (with Nvidia GPU) is more or less guaranteed a decent baseline experience and significant value-add over a non GSync display.
 

hixbot

Distinguished
Oct 29, 2007
818
0
18,990
1
Console devs target a locked 30fps or 60fps. Something they can do because they know exactly what hardware to focuse their optimizations. Adaptive refresh rates are not necessary on televisions unless you're using a PC gaming on your tv
 

nitrium

Distinguished
Jul 27, 2009
1,489
31
19,690
195

They "target" that, but they often don't get it. Look at games like Witcher 3, No Man's Sky, Fallout 4 + many others. All have distracting framerate dips, which could be mitigated by FreeSync. Even if they lock at 30 fps because 60fps wasn't going to happen, being able to get a smooth 45 fps, for example, is still superior.

 

ohim

Distinguished
Feb 10, 2009
1,195
0
19,360
26
Some people in the comment section try to put a price on FreeSync no matter what. The tech is in the VESA specifications and AMD will not charge you anything, to make a VESA compliant device the company doing so will probably pay a fee but it`s not for the FreeSync, even G-Sync monitors have to be VESA compliant, and even Nvidia GPUs can handle FreeSync, but make Nvidia do it if you can.

At this moment even with Nvidia`s PC GPU market monopoly they lost with their pricy G-Sync.
 

Simon Ayres

Honorable
Jun 18, 2013
265
0
10,810
10
"FreeSync is an open-source variable refresh rate technology that matches the refresh rate of the GPU to the display"

Doesn't t work the other way around? Adapts the Display to the GPU output?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS