Samsung, AMD Announce First FreeSync Monitors, Coming March 2015

Status
Not open for further replies.
So if this is an open standard using the DP1.2a protocol, does that mean any card with the correct DP port as well as nVidia cards will work?
AFAIK all nvidia cards up to maxwell only supporting DP1.2. also i think nvidia already mention that they will not going to support adaptive sync and will push with their own solution instead because they believe their solution will be better than AMD FreeSync+Adaptive Sync. also adaptive sync is optional to DP1.2a and DP1.3.

anyway what i want to see was real game running using AMD FreeSync and Adaptive Sync. AMD keeps pointing that their solution will be better than Nvidia G-Sync but so far they haven't back up their claim with real data shown to the public yet.
 


as it is i believe it will only work with AMD (select) graphic card. nvidia already mention that they will only going to support g-sync. as for intel it seems they are not even interested with it. if not we should be hearing about it right now.
 

airborn824

Honorable
Mar 3, 2013
226
0
10,690
3
Combine the new Freesync 120hz 4K monitors wiith a R9 39x "MIND BLOWN". Tis is a great partnership stemming from AMD zen CPUs using Samsung 14nm in Q4 2015. I am sure Samsung will be shipping a lot of AMD PCs here soon. About time AMD got a very large OEM to back them.
 

airborn824

Honorable
Mar 3, 2013
226
0
10,690
3
Combine the new Freesync 120hz 4K monitors wiith a R9 39x "MIND BLOWN". Tis is a great partnership stemming from AMD zen CPUs using Samsung 14nm in Q4 2015. I am sure Samsung will be shipping a lot of AMD PCs here soon. About time AMD got a very large OEM to back them.
 

Bondfc11

Honorable
Sep 3, 2013
232
0
10,680
0
I hold off excitement until we see third party reviews of Async actually working. I still find it hard to believe that a simple chip and software write (on the GPU side) is all that is necessary to achieve variable rates driven by the GPU's rendering and the monitor's ability to handle the frame.

If so - then why did Nvidia go through all it has to get GSYNC rolling? Why the expense, time, effort if it is so easy? Makes no sense to me. Tom Petersen is on plenty of videos claiming no other option was viable and worked well. Cannot wait to see who is right on this one.
 

dovah-chan

Honorable
Feb 5, 2014
1,339
0
11,960
236
It's because their solution is not based on any sort of open standards.

I'll try to explain this simply. Basically with G-Sync, there is proprietary technology within Nvidia cards that is there in order to recognize the G-Sync controller on the monitor. Then the GPU will start sending signals which include information on the framerate and based on the variable framerate, the controller will dynamically adjust the refresh rate on the panel in order to keep the two values in sync.

Free Sync operates in a such way in which through the display port 1.2a/1.3 interface, they send the same framerate signal and the display port interface on the monitor that the GPU display port is hooked up to, recieves those signals and data and the panel that is compliant with the display port 1.2a/1.3 interface on the monitor, will adjust it's refresh rate accordingly.

The achieved result will most likely be the same but the way both companies are tackling the problem is different.

Now of course this is a simplified version but it's the basic methodology that separates the two methods.

I personally am rooting for Free Sync as open standards and transparency are what drive the world forward. Proprietary methods and extra costs are really only a hint of avarice and only slow progress down more as it takes more time to adopt versus a free and open standard that anyone can implement.
 
^ still AMD keep mentioning their solution is superior from nvidia g-sync. i just hope they really back that up with real gaming usage which so far there is none except for marketing slides. also i want to know if FreeSync will work will all games without the need for driver to be tweaked for specific game for it to work.
 


Free Sync is AMD technology. the one that open standard is Adaptive Sync. but even if Adaptive Sync is open standard as far as i know AMD was the only company that proposed the spec to VESA. and if i remember correctly it is based on AMD own FreeSync tech as a base for the gpu portion part. so it is possible if other hardware vendor want adaptive sync to work with their GPU they might need similar hardware that exist in current AMD GPU. and AMD once said that nvidia need G-Sync module in monitors because they don't have something that already exist in AMD GPU.
 

somebodyspecial

Honorable
Sep 20, 2012
1,459
0
11,310
20
"All AMD Radeon™ graphics cards in the AMD Radeon™ HD 7000, HD 8000, R7 or R9 Series will support Project FreeSync for video playback and power-saving purposes. The AMD Radeon™ R9 295X2, 290X, R9 290, R9 285, R7 260X and R7 260 GPUs additionally feature updated display controllers that will support dynamic refresh rates during gaming."

So, NO, only R9 295X2, 290X, R9 290, R9 285, R7 260X and R7 260 actually use this tech for GAMING. If you don't have one of these cards YOU WON'T GET FREESYNC working in your games.

March is a long ways away, and I see no price to show it's cheaper. Toms is wrong saying this is free to implement. Scaler tech costs, testing costs etc to get the certification and display the label on your monitor. We will have to wait to see how CHEAP "FREE" really is...LOL. Considering how small the group of users is owning the AMD cards listed above that REALLY work with this (remember NV owns 68% of the discrete market as of this Q), most of us need Vid cards AND the monitor (like me with my radeon 5850). Unless AMD can prove it works with all games without waiting for them to optimize per game (in any way), and it's $100 cheaper than buying NV+monitor at the same time, I'll go NV. IF it isn't as good, even for an extra $100, I'll go NV. I'll pay for proprietary when it's actually BETTER as long as the price is reasonable and $100 is reasonable when I consider my current monitors are both 7yrs old now. That works out to $1 a month for "hey man it just WORKS" which NV has proven their solution DOES. I have my doubts about AMD's solution especially considering we still have ZERO game demos of it shown in action in reviewers hands for judgement. Hmmm...Not even a single private showing with reviewers hands off. Odd?
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

FreeSync is nothing more than AMD's house-brand for Adaptive Sync: AMD does not own the trademark on Adaptive Sync so they had to come up with something else for their brand war against G-Sync and that's where FreeSync comes in. Functionally, it requires absolutely nothing more from the monitor than standard DP with Adaptive Sync support.

In other words, the FreeSync brand serves absolutely no purpose beyond co-op marketing between AMD and participating display manufacturers. Everything else is baked into DP 1.2a AdaptiveSync.

 


except AMD come up with the 'FreeSync' term even before they propose the spec needed for FreeSync to work to VESA. so it is not because they cannot trademark Adaptive Sync name when they already come up with FreeSync name even before the spec was called as Adaptive Sync by VESA. AMD was very clear about the difference between FreeSync and Adaptive Sync.
 
GSync vs FreeSync

1) NVidia could have done the same thing AMD is doing, however it would have taken LONGER to come to market.

Early adoption vs higher cost if custom part? You be the judge.

2) AMD made some bold claims that their approach is superior due to latency issues with NVidia GSync.

There's NO evidence of that. GSync is here and works well so be careful AMD with your claims.

*Wait, AMD claims that there's no "talking" invovled between GPU and monitor hence the lack of delay. I doubt NVidia did anything unnecessarily so is it possible ASync won't be able to synchronize as quickly?

Something's just not right here. Testing will tell.

3) Cost.
It's still whatever the manufacturer wants to charge. GSync may end up more expensive but it also may end up superior.

4) Cards supported.
NVidia has more for GSync than AMD has for FreeSync.

5) Other:
The asynchronous aspect isn't the only issue with monitors so keep that in mind. Response time, strobing, and other factors are important in creating the "perfect" monitor.

For GAMING, asynchronous communication is a massive deal. I'd love to see support on HDTV's and hookup my PC/Steambox.

Summary:
While I'd like to see this a standard, open model I have to give kudos to NVidia for bringing it earlier. They did what was needed to bring it to marker as soon as possible.

It's fine to claim it should be "open" but someone has to pay for the research. I think AMD would have done it themselves if they'd had the cash.

I'm NOT a fanboy, however I'm getting a little annoyed with AMD harping that FreeSync will be superior (due to latency) with no proof and GSync working.
 

mitch074

Distinguished
@photonboy : Active Sync actually already works : in laptops, for video playback. Thus, it already has live use - but not in gaming. AFAIK, Adaptive Sync/FreeSync required research and consensus (i.e. what goes into establishing a strong standard) while Nvidia favoured the proprietary solution - G-sync is basically Nvidia telling display makers "here's our clock generator, include it in your screen, add branding - and raise the price. Here's the bill for our clock generator."

So, while Nvidia's solution was the fist solution to the Desktop Gaming market, AMD's is the first standard-compliant implementation. As for Intel not caring, they don't - it's probably already supported in their hardware, but since they don't have graphics powerful enough to game with, the basic implementation (video playback) is enough for them.
 

rokit

Honorable
Sep 27, 2013
155
0
10,680
0

Nvidia's solution is nowhere in the market. They didn't won anything, they're extremely small minority. On the other hand each new monitor will have DP 1.3





Nvidia released more cards in the same time period. So this kind of more means nothing.
 


if nvidia solution is not in the market then why you can buy G-Sync based monitor right now? also not all monittor will have DP connection. just as it is right now monitor maker still sell monitor without DP or without HDMI (in my local store monitor with DP connection is almost none existent). not to mention Adaptive Sync is optinal to DP 1.2a and DP 1.3 spec. the most likely scenario that i can see is monitor maker will going to charge premium price just for Adaptive Sync feature alone just like current G-Sync monitor. initially nvidia expect G-Sync based monitor to cost around 400. but the end product was much more expensive just because G-Sync is a gaming feature for gaming monitor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS