Nvidia To Support G-Sync Alternative Adaptive-Sync? Nvidia Say No

[N.Broekhuijsen]

Is it possible that Nvidia will support the Adaptive-Sync technology that AMD has been pushing?

Nvidia To Support G-Sync Alternative Adaptive-Sync? Nvidia Say No : Read more

 

[lelutinbanni]

Nvidia is the Apple of the GPU market !

 

[zanny]

Nvidia is the Apple of the GPU market !

Now I'm no Apple fan, but at least they open source their core projects - Bonjour, Cups, LLVM, etc all through Darwin. Nvidia's GPU ISAs are proprietary so you cannot even try writing your own drivers for them. That is entirely unheard of in most other semiconductor fields.

 

[TechyInAZ]

Well it does make since that NVidia doesn't support it, since they would be loosing money on there G-sync monitors so that I can see.

I hope that this will be a industry standard soon, since I believe we've needed a frame rate update for not just games, but movies and videos.

 

[salgado18]

All it takes is Intel supporting it, then it will be standard in no time, and Nvidia will have to follow.

 

[crisan_tiberiu]

so, Nvidia's mentality is" if you want the hardware to work properly (GPU+Monitor) then you have to pay extra". Thats gg. Because screen tearing for LCDs was not wanted in the first place but they didnt have a proper solution for it.

 

[hannibal]

Nvidia can wait. They can sell expensive g-sync chips and wait until adaptive sync is popular enough and then make transition... They know how to make busines!
I would wait, untill we really can compare 120 Hz gsync and adaptive sync monitors. And then decide what to do. The competition will make good to the prices of g-sync also! It may always be more expensive and in long run it may be possible that adaptive sync wins because all other gpu makers are going to use it. In PC world it is very hard to win market with monopoly/closed systems. It is bad for customers, so they/we normally defend ourselves from them.

 

[tobalaz]

Look, I was all for Gsync but adding at least $200 to an already $400 monitor to make it work?
Sheesh! That's crazy!
I never had screen tearing issues with my old 100 lb 24" CRT. (didn't have much energy left after hauling it up and down stairs either, lol)
I agree with sal, all its going to take to get something standardized is getting Intel behind it, they have more GPUs and CPUs in systems across the planet then anyone else, and since AMD and Intel already have several cross licenses in place concerning x86 it shouldn't be a stretch to get Intel to bite on something for free that makes their own products better as well, which in turn forces Nvidia to adopt it as well or get left behind.
Gsync was a terrific idea, and like Mantle, it forced others to make changes that benefit us all, whether we embrace that early tech or not.

 

[none12345]

Man on this alone, i probably wont even consider nvidia for my next graphics upgrade. Which is sad, considering how many of their cards ive bought over the years.

 

[none12345]

Gsync is good not because of gsync, but because it brought a long standing issue to the foreground. AMD solved it the correct way, using something that is already in the standard vs using hundreds of dollars of add on hardware to get it to work. This should be a no brainer. Use the standard, get the problem sorted once and for all at very little or no additional cost to the consumer.

Just like mantle isnt good because its mantle. It brought attention to a long standing problem. It doesnt have to take hold, because directx and opengl will get their arse into gear and address the problem as well, and the industry will be better for it.

 

[CraigN]

Just leaving this post from an ASUS rep on their boards here, especially since "Adaptive Sync" is not as cheap to implement as everyone thinks.

This not 'ASUS official' - it's just a bit of background info on the machinations of product development to help our fans understand more. We love all our partners equally and wish only the best consumer choice

Having an 'industry standard' is only a first step. It doesn't suddenly make everyone jump onboard unfortunately. Now VESA is onboard though, things will get rolling, but it will not likely be fast.

Also, this doesn't take into account LCD/display companies are already deeply invested in 'more popular' technologies with more extensive market applications: 21:9, touchscreen, 4K, curved displays etc (remember they are not gamers).

Adaptive refresh needs a ASIC display IC physical redesign, not just a firmware update. This means silicon redesign, tape out, manuf, testing, firmware - the lot. AFAIK that's typically 12 months FROM NOW to get it on our hands (but I dont work for IC companies, so I dont know their roadmaps) - let alone 6 more months of product dev work to actually make a retail display. And that's all IF display IC manuf. decided to update for 1.2a, and not just wait for 1.3 (business speak: If company bean counters ask "why would you pay for two updates, when 1.2a rolls into 1.3 anyway?" how do you justify it?)

Not just display ICs, but LCD firmwares and GPU drivers too. AMD will obv support it, Intel has yet to publicly commit to any of it (go ask them), and Nvidia is (so far) backing its own solution as it is also yet to officially comment (again, go talk to them).

I expect Nvidia has been working on GSync for a year+ before they showed it last Nov - remember they use an FPGA not ASIC IC, so time to market is faster, but FPGAs are v.v.expensive. And 9 months after first show we're only now just getting ready to ship hardware. That's the kind of timescales we're looking at. So anyone thinking any display manuf. will magically pop out a display to compete with Gsync this year is mistaken: my educated guess is that GSync is your only choice until very likely well into 2015.

Short term:
Until further notice we are committed to GSync and PG278Q, as logically it's the only market ready technology. Given our close working relationship with Nvidia, we're hugely confident that PG278Q will still be the best possible GSync LCD on the market.

Medium term:
ASUS is standards agnostic: Freesync/GSync - we will work with all parties and investigate everything (that's no commitment either way). At the very least, this VESA 1.2a/1.3 will give great consumer choice!

Long term:
Will GSync and Freesync ultimately converge? Who knows. That bridge is ~years away.

I'd love to see a standard adaptive refresh monitor that's GPU agnostic (as we make all AMD/Intel/NV hardware), but that's long long term. If you bought PG278 this year, whatever happens in 'long term' will likely be your replacement!

 

[10hellfire01]

I'm pretty confident they will support it. Sweclockers were at the presentations, so they have no reason to lie.

Anyways, it's also like WCCFTech said: it's a VESA standard now. Nvidia would have to be ape **** not to go along.

 

[rdc85]

All it takes is Intel supporting it, then it will be standard in no time, and Nvidia will have to follow.

Agreed, I hope intel will support it..

IMO, For Asus "rep" response, Isn't Asus has a agreement/privilege as the only brand with G-sync for time being.
I doubt it will "praise" it's competitor tech... (they need to sells its g-sync monitor anyways)

 

[WickedSoN]

Adaptive-sync is going to cost an upcharge just like g-sync. You are kidding yourself if you think otherwise. Monitor manufacturers will still need to create new scaler models to work with AMD's "free"-sync and you best believe they are going to upcharge for the new hardware. As a monitor maker I'd much rather support g-sync and just purchase the already made technology from them to intergrate into my current line up, instead of having to re-invent the wheel (g-sync is already NOWtech). AMD is marketing it as free-sync because they are desperate to save face. I don't think they have the means to do it themselves so they are pointing the responsibility at the monitor makers. Come on. I think eventually Adaptive-Sync will become standardized, but it ain't going to be anytime soon. Meanwhile Nvidia would be smart to capitalize on the market and etch g-sync into everything they can get their hands on. Now that they have the advantage they need to really push the technology, if that means driving down costs for the manufacturers to make g-sync more appealing then they should be willing to take a smaller profit margin. It would be a long term investment if they can keep the manufacturers from deciding on developing their own scaler's to support A-sync.

 

[Bondfc11]

Gsync is not limited to one company - there are already multiple monitors on the market and announced with Gsync with more on the way

 

[ohim]

Heh ... and i was thinking into selling my Sapphire 290 vapor-x for a GTX 970 just because that card makes less heat and less power hungry ... now i remember why i hate Nvidia(had nvidia since TNT2 to GTX760). Not gonna see my money again unless i have no other alternatives. Closed minded companies trying to push closed tech is not good for us.

And to be honest i kinda wish DX12 will fail and Mantle will still be a thing just to piss Nvidia off..I know i sound like a fan boy but still they try to limit their customers to only expensive monitors ... and let`s not forget that if i own AMD and i pay Nvidia for their GPU they are still not letting me use PhysX ....That`s just foulplay there .. since you pay for their advertised product and they don`t give it to you.

It`s like Ferrari giving you a car without clutch because you already own a Porsche...

 

[laststop311]

If free sync ends up being much cheaper than g sync while doing the same thing and the tech becomes a cheap add in for monitor makers then I hope nvidia will concede defeat and support it.

 

[rdc85]

Gsync is not limited to one company - there are already multiple monitors on the market and announced with Gsync with more on the way

From what i read before, ASUS had one year privilege to make/sell g-sync monitor. other brands/company will have to wait later.. Is this already changed ?

 

[rokit]

Classic Nvidia. Thats why i don't like this company. Intel changed over years, Nvidia not in the slightest.

 

[Ninjawithagun]

"...although given that the Adaptive-Sync standard isn't expected to cost all that much..."

NOT! Where did they author get his degree for journalism? Captain Crunch University?? Adaptive Sync is definitely going to cost as much if not more than G-Sync. "Why?" you might ask? Simple. Adaptive Sync requires very similiary technology that G-Sync uses (and Nvidia knows this!). The scaler on an Adaptive Sync monitor is not ordinary and requires a special set of hardware that allows for full duplex communication with the graphics card as well as the screen display itself to have the capability to redraw the frame when directed to do so by the graphics card. Needless to say, AMD is full of it if they think they can lie to the tech community anymore about it's BS vapor Free-Sync. Not buying it sorry! All out of any interest to by swamp land in Florida too ;-) Give Nvidia credit where credit is due. They invented a dynamic refresh rate technology and it works!! Stop hating people. Stop thinking like a caveman just because you decided to buy an AMD card and now are pissed off because AMD lied about Free-Sync and now you are stuck with no dynamic refresh rate technology. Try refocusing your hate on AMD for not only lieing to you, but also for not being innovative to compete with their own REAL dynamic refresh rate technology. NUFF SAID!

 

[shahrooz]

I'm starting to hate Nvidia

 

[WickedSoN]

READ WHAT NINJAWITHAGUN WROTE. All you people are directing your hate at the wrong company. If AMD was truly honest they should have named their idea to "Free-for-AMD-sync". AMD can't afford to to invent something like G-SYNC so they come up with a catch name for another way to doing that STILL requires new hardware inside monitor's to enable it. If it was TRULY FREE SYNC, then why can't we use it NOW with our current monitors??? BECAUSE ITS NOT FREE, monitor makers will need to add hardware to support it, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO ADD THIS HARDWARE FOR FREE TO THE CONSUMER. YOU WILL PAY FOR ADAPTIVE SYNC!

 

[The_Trutherizer]

This is exactly the reason for why I prefer pumping money into the open space. The proprietary freaks like NVidia would see me locked down on them. Too invested in their hardware, their games, their screens, their everything to even be able to consider busying from somebody else.

PhysX anybody?

Its this kind of thing that holds the industry back. Good for nobody except NVidia shareholders while they can get it right.

 

[hixbot]

"...although given that the Adaptive-Sync standard isn't expected to cost all that much..."

NOT! Where did they author get his degree for journalism? Captain Crunch University?? Adaptive Sync is definitely going to cost as much if not more than G-Sync. "Why?" you might ask? Simple. Adaptive Sync requires very similiary technology that G-Sync uses (and Nvidia knows this!). The scaler on an Adaptive Sync monitor is not ordinary and requires a special set of hardware that allows for full duplex communication with the graphics card as well as the screen display itself to have the capability to redraw the frame when directed to do so by the graphics card. Needless to say, AMD is full of it if they think they can lie to the tech community anymore about it's BS vapor Free-Sync. Not buying it sorry! All out of any interest to by swamp land in Florida too ;-) Give Nvidia credit where credit is due. They invented a dynamic refresh rate technology and it works!! Stop hating people. Stop thinking like a caveman just because you decided to buy an AMD card and now are pissed off because AMD lied about Free-Sync and now you are stuck with no dynamic refresh rate technology. Try refocusing your hate on AMD for not only lieing to you, but also for not being innovative to compete with their own REAL dynamic refresh rate technology. NUFF SAID!

Wow, what are you talking about? You sound like a crazy fan boy.

You are criticizing those who criticize Nvidia for saying no to an Open Standard that is adopted by a new Display Port version? What is your basis? That AMD users are jealous and upset and that AMD has lied to them about costs of the monitor tech?

Even if that were true, what is the relevance? Nvidia is refusing to support an open standard that is specified in the Display Port standard. Full stop.
That is outrageous. AMD users are not the only ones complaining, I'm an Nvidia user, I'll likely be buying the new 980. I like the look of Gsync, but I'd be outraged if Nvidia would ignore a standard (but not surprised they are claiming so).

I'd immensely prefer if it was an open standard that monitor manufacturers would feel confident that all PC gamers would benefit (Nvidia, AMD and Intel). As it stands gysnc is a closed standard that is only supported by Nvidia, and at the moment, a couple Asus monitors. It's barely penetrated the marked, and it's the closed standard and an exclusive deal with Asus that is cause.
If Nvidia wants to keep their tech exclusive to themselves, then monitor manufacturers are less likely to jump on the tech.. but fine, I'll accept that this is Nvidia's game to keep gsync exclusive. Refusing to support Adaptive Sync, however, is a straight-up kick in the face to the entire concept of electronic standards.

If the tech were based on an open standard, then monitor manufacturers can add the support (yes, there is a cost) and expect to reach all pc gamers. Nvidia are claiming they will not support the open standard. That is a lie, they'd be crazy to ignore a Display Port standard. Guess what? They are lying for one reason, to reassure those who might buy a Nvidia card that Gsync monitors are the only option and will be the only option in the future. but mark my words, once Adaptive Sync is adopted by the bulk of monitors manufacturers (who will of course not ignore Display Port standards), Nvidia will have no choice but to adopt too.

 

[geofer]

Back in May, VESA announced that it added the Adaptive-Sync protocol as an option to the DisplayPort 1.2a specification enabling an open frame-synchronization technique.

There is one word that is very important in there and that is "Option". This implies 2 things.

One, monitor manufacturers don't HAVE to implement Free-Sync into their monitors which is great because that means we can still buy cheap monitors.

Two, there is nothing Free in Free-Sync to the monitor manufacturers. The only difference between AMD and Nvidia in this is that Nvidia gets a cut from this whole thing. It still costs money to put in G-Sync tech OR Freesync tech into a display. There is no $0.00 for FreeSync chip or G-sync chip. It' still costs money to make this stuff. That's where A LOT of people are overlooking and basically thinking Free-Sync is the savior of us all.

Plus, variable refresh rate technology is something that was created to cater to gamers. All the G-Sync monitors on the market now are being advertised to gamers. FreeSync will be the same way so those expecting these monitors to be ridiculously cheaper than G-Sync will have a shocking surprise. Not to mention in order to use FreeSync you will need certain Radeon cards (Just like G-Sync). I could see people who flip flop between both brands could benefit from this if it was supported by Nvidia, not sure how many do though ever time a new card is released.

I'm predicting Freesync and G-Sync will end up being like Radeon vs Geforce/ Intel vs AMD is. One will be better in performance, but cost more (Nvidia), while the other will be good and slightly cheaper, but not as good as the other ( AMD). Again, this is my 2 cents in this so we might see a 1440p Freesync monitor that may or may not do 120Hz and will probably go for around $650-$750 vs the current G-Sync equivalent that is $800.