New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by TranquilTempest

Looks like higher data rates, and support for compression.
Some tablets implement PSR, which is NOT what adaptive sync is based on(but g-sync does include panel self refresh). Here's some more info:
Pointless necro. ThereIt's you that needs to take a closer look. The video of the CES demo looks identical to v-sync at a fixed 50hz refresh rate, and as far as I can tell the computex demo is also consistent with fixed refresh rate.
18 cores on a single die?! What is that, a $4k chip?
Also, people will tolerate a 2 year lifespan on a phone more readily than on a monitor.
Nvidia will support adaptive sync on desktop monitors if the extra GPU sales to people that already have adaptive sync monitors outweighs the development costs and lost g-sync sales. That balance point won't be hit for years, when the people that bought adaptive sync monitors start looking for new video cards. This is basic economics. They may support laptop/tablet displays before that, because they wouldn't be losing display sales by supporting it there. As for g-sync...
Well, most AMD users will have to buy a new video card anyway, because freesync won't work on tahiti or pitcairn.
AMD pursues AMD's interests, Nvidia pursues Nvidia's interests. The only question is how to consumers pursue THEIR OWN interests. Do you support the company that's stirring up trouble by pushing new technologies into the market or the one that might eventually bring prices down.The point is, if you want it, and can afford it, buy it. It will only encourage companies to take risks on developing new tech.
In the long run, I think the company that's solving new problems is going to have a bigger benefit. EVENTUALLY AMD might catch up, but don't come crying when you wait another year for your monitors, and they're not any cheaper than a g-sync monitor with equivalent performance.
It seems AMD's claims are also slipping on which GPUs will be supported.
New Posts  All Forums: