Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [AnandTech] AMD FreeSync.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[AnandTech] AMD FreeSync. - Page 36  

post #351 of 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoleras View Post

That portion isn't specifically stated. It's more or less common sense though. I can't think of a display interface that has ever, ever, in the past been retroactively upgrade-able. It just doesn't make sense. Backwards compatible, yes, but you can't magically turn a DP 1.1 device into a DP 1.2 device. Same for DP 1.2 > 1.3.

I know, but around here, "common sense" isn't very common with certain people here.

We've already gone down the path of "You can't update the firmware on your motherboard and turn your USB 2.0 ports into USB 3.0 ports" path, but some people just aren't getting that.
Edited by 47 Knucklehead - 1/10/14 at 5:10pm
post #352 of 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcg75 View Post

Most monitors that are sold are not gamed on and don't need this tech built in.

This is something else I've mentioned before, but has been ignored.

The VBLANK feature that AMD is using to make FreeSync possible, is NOT a gaming feature. It is a power saving feature

Like I said before, it is absolutely unheard of for a power saving feature to improve gaming performance. And for that reason, there is no downside to including it as a feature, and there will be huge demand from everybody to implement it. Manufacturers would be stupid not to implement it. Once it becomes mainstream, it will be included in all LCD controllers by default, at which point it won't even increase the cost at all. So, there will come a time (I predict 1 to 2 years after the first VBLANK monitor hits stores), that nobody will want to buy a new monitor without it.
Death Star
(21 items)
 
Darksaber
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon II x2 245 Asus M3A78 Radeon HD6570 1GB Mushkin Silverline 2GB DDR2  
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ Vertex 2 120GB Samsung Blu-Ray Windows 7 Samsung 46" DLP 
PowerCaseOther
Silverstone Strider Essentials 400W Silverstone Milo ML03B Hauppage WinTV 1250 
  hide details  
Death Star
(21 items)
 
Darksaber
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon II x2 245 Asus M3A78 Radeon HD6570 1GB Mushkin Silverline 2GB DDR2  
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ Vertex 2 120GB Samsung Blu-Ray Windows 7 Samsung 46" DLP 
PowerCaseOther
Silverstone Strider Essentials 400W Silverstone Milo ML03B Hauppage WinTV 1250 
  hide details  
post #353 of 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge View Post

This is something else I've mentioned before, but has been ignored.

The VBLANK feature that AMD is using to make FreeSync possible, is NOT a gaming feature. It is a power saving feature

Like I said before, it is absolutely unheard of for a power saving feature to improve gaming performance. And for that reason, there is no downside to including it as a feature, and there will be huge demand from everybody to implement it. Manufacturers would be stupid not to implement it. Once it becomes mainstream, it will be included in all LCD controllers by default, at which point it won't even increase the cost at all. So, there will come a time (I predict 1 to 2 years after the first VBLANK monitor hits stores), that nobody will want to buy a new monitor without it.

WRONG. I'll just post this again:

As far as energy efficiency, that is what laptops use it for via eDP. You don't want this in desktop monitors, unless you want framerates or refresh rates to randomly jump at crazy intervals. Energy efficiency of modern desktop panels are pretty good, anyway, so I don't see how that is applicable. I can't think of any type of auto dimming or refresh rate dynamically lowering as being wanted on the desktop. Personally when my refresh rate goes from 120 to 60, even on the desktop, it is noticeable. I've used a 4k 30hz panel. At 30hz, the response is noticeably much worse than 60hz. You're not using a desktop monitor on a battery life type of system so this is not desirable. It creates situations where input response time becomes worse - like I said, your refresh can randomly go from 60 to 30hz. You don't want this. That's why desktop screens do not use eDP.

Think about what you're asking for. eDP with this feature can dynamically change the refresh from 60 to 30 to 15 all to save battery life. Aside from a monitor on the desktop NOT USING A BATTERY, you'd have to be insane to want your refresh rate to constantly fluctuate. Going from 60 to 30 is a huge noticeable difference. And this is what laptops with eDP do when they're using power saving features.
post #354 of 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by 47 Knucklehead View Post

We've already gone down the path of "You can't update the firmware on your motherboard and turn your USB 2.0 ports into USB 3.0 ports" path, but some people just aren't getting that.

First,
USB is a bad example for comparison with DP. Ethernet would be a better comparison because ethernet and DP both communicate in the same basic manner. USB does not. USB is more closely related to SATA or PCI-e.

Second,
Nobody has made the claim that its possible to turn DP1.2 into DP1.3 with a firmware update. You seem to think people have claimed that, but nobody has. I checked.
What HAS been claimed is that is should be possible to enable extra features in DP1.2 with a just software update. Everyone but you understands that VBLANK =/= DP1.3.

All that's needed is for the LCD controller to passthrough control of the refresh rate to the gpu (that's all that g-sync does too). Not a very complex feature when you look at it that way. It's just never really been needed before. The whole concept of a fixed refresh rate dates back to CRT monitors, where the refresh rate actually mattered. LCD's don't suffer the same limitations as CRT's. But the fixed refresh rates have hung around this long since nobody cared enough to do anything about it, because there was no real need to. Now that there is a reason, the implementation should become universal in a relatively short time
Death Star
(21 items)
 
Darksaber
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon II x2 245 Asus M3A78 Radeon HD6570 1GB Mushkin Silverline 2GB DDR2  
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ Vertex 2 120GB Samsung Blu-Ray Windows 7 Samsung 46" DLP 
PowerCaseOther
Silverstone Strider Essentials 400W Silverstone Milo ML03B Hauppage WinTV 1250 
  hide details  
Death Star
(21 items)
 
Darksaber
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon II x2 245 Asus M3A78 Radeon HD6570 1GB Mushkin Silverline 2GB DDR2  
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ Vertex 2 120GB Samsung Blu-Ray Windows 7 Samsung 46" DLP 
PowerCaseOther
Silverstone Strider Essentials 400W Silverstone Milo ML03B Hauppage WinTV 1250 
  hide details  
post #355 of 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoleras View Post

That's why desktop screens do not use eDP.

Noooo..... eDP stands for Embedded-DisplayPort. Desktop screens don't use it, because they are not embedded! Would people just forget about eDP already? It's not needed for this to work.

Also, just because you've used a monitor with a poorly implemented dynamic refresh rate, doesn't mean they will all be that bad.
The idea of how it works is very simple: It will update the lcd only whenever there is something to update. Unlike the current model where the LCD updates at a fixed frequency whether it needs to or not. In other words, the monitor refresh rate will always match the fps coming out of the gpu. That saves energy by avoiding unnecessary screen refreshes and it smooths out screen output by updating as soon as the next image is available, instead of waiting for the next refresh cycle. It's the best of both worlds with no inherit drawbacks.
So most of the time, it would be running at ether the same variable rate as the gpu or the max possible rate of the monitor, whichever is lower. It would only drop to 15Hz if your GPU is only putting out 15fps. In which case, the problem is not the monitor. Maybe it might also go that low if it's on some aggressive power saving plan, but something like that should be user configurable.

Last,
It makes no difference if the device runs on batteries or not. Power savings is NEVER a bad thing. As long as it doesn't hurt performance, which this won't. Why do you think there's so many non-battery operated devices that brag about been "Green" or Eco-friendly? If there's a way to improve performance AND efficiency without affecting cost... like I said, the manufacturers would be stupid not to implement it.
Edited by wedge - 1/10/14 at 6:04pm
Death Star
(21 items)
 
Darksaber
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon II x2 245 Asus M3A78 Radeon HD6570 1GB Mushkin Silverline 2GB DDR2  
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ Vertex 2 120GB Samsung Blu-Ray Windows 7 Samsung 46" DLP 
PowerCaseOther
Silverstone Strider Essentials 400W Silverstone Milo ML03B Hauppage WinTV 1250 
  hide details  
Death Star
(21 items)
 
Darksaber
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon II x2 245 Asus M3A78 Radeon HD6570 1GB Mushkin Silverline 2GB DDR2  
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ Vertex 2 120GB Samsung Blu-Ray Windows 7 Samsung 46" DLP 
PowerCaseOther
Silverstone Strider Essentials 400W Silverstone Milo ML03B Hauppage WinTV 1250 
  hide details  
post #356 of 388
Again, you don't understand how eDP achieves those power savings. It achieves such by lowering the refresh rate of the panel depending on your battery life.

Now if your'e going to sit there and tell me, you don't see a difference between 60 and 30hz even on the desktop, I would call you a liar. This is how eDP achieves better laptop battery life. By lowering the refresh rate. There's other stuff too - auto dimming when you close the lid of a laptop, so on and so forth.

But I can tell you. There's a major perceptible difference between 120 and 60 hz, and 60 and 30hz. VERY noticeable. Espeically in windows, especially on the desktop. You notice it when you move the mouse. You notice choppiness. This is what eDP does to get bettery life in laptops - dynamically lowering the refresh from 60 to 30. or 45. It is noticeable on laptops. This is not something you want on a desktop screen, and if you're going to tell me that you don't notice the mouse responsiveness and general "snappiness" of windows between 60 and 30hz, I would call you out for being disingenuous.

If you want to talk up the variable refresh rate portion of free-sync, have at it. The power savings angle is stupid. Even 1600p IPS panels barely sip 100W-150 at medium brightness these days. TN panels use even less. This is also ignoring the fact that desktop panels DO NOT OPERATE ON A BATTERY. Therefore degrading 2D performance by changing the refresh rate to 30hz would be absurd.

Modern panels released in the past year DO NOT use a lot of power. So I literally have no idea why you're talking up this efficiency angle. This is aside from the fact that eDP power savings are designed to curtail battery life in laptops, and it does so in a way that DEGRADES windows responsiveness, even in 2D windows.
Edited by xoleras - 1/10/14 at 6:09pm
post #357 of 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge View Post

But, you're wrong on one part, a new monitor with G-Sync will definitely be more expensive than one with vblank, not just because of the licensing cost to nividia. But also because it will come will a G-Sync stamp of approval that will raise the retail price by default. New monitors that support vblank should be no more expensive than any other monitor, because they will technically just be normal monitors.

That's also speculation, we don't know that for sure. No one knows what the licensing cost of G-sync is, if there even is one (heck, at this point Nvidia may be paying manufacturers to include the module in order to spur adoption), and no one knows what G-sync enabled monitors will cost by the time Vblank enabled monitors come out (which is probably not until 2015). G-sync monitors do cost more now, but we don't know what will happen over the next year. Plus, there's no guarantee that Vblank-enabled ASICs will be standard for all monitors, or if it will be a special edition kind of thing.
Edited by Forceman - 1/10/14 at 6:14pm
post #358 of 388
Oh yeah. Let me throw an example out here of monitor power usage:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u3014.htm

Here's the power consumption of the Dell u3014. A 30 inch IPS 1600p panel. Keep in mind this monitor uses FAR MORE power than any 1080p TN panel:


State and Brightness Setting
Factory Default (50%)

60.0 MFGR SPEC - 59.7W measured at wall.


Maximum Brightness (100%)

120.0 MFGR SPEC - 76.4W actually measured at wall.

Minimum Brightness (0%)

30.5 measured at wall.

Standby
<0.5Watts. measured at the wall.



The highest end 1600p panel you can buy uses 76 watts at the wall at maximum brightness. And if you've used IPS panels, you'd know that most people use them at 50% brightness, because IPS is REALLY REALLY bright.. And you're going to argue the power consumption angle? Keep in mind 1080p panels use FAR LESS than this. At least the ones developed in the past two years, power consumption is a NON ISSUE.
Edited by xoleras - 1/10/14 at 6:17pm
post #359 of 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forceman View Post

That's also speculation

Fair enough. But that doesn't make it wrong. I consider it a pretty safe assumption.
Death Star
(21 items)
 
Darksaber
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon II x2 245 Asus M3A78 Radeon HD6570 1GB Mushkin Silverline 2GB DDR2  
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ Vertex 2 120GB Samsung Blu-Ray Windows 7 Samsung 46" DLP 
PowerCaseOther
Silverstone Strider Essentials 400W Silverstone Milo ML03B Hauppage WinTV 1250 
  hide details  
Death Star
(21 items)
 
Darksaber
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon II x2 245 Asus M3A78 Radeon HD6570 1GB Mushkin Silverline 2GB DDR2  
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ Vertex 2 120GB Samsung Blu-Ray Windows 7 Samsung 46" DLP 
PowerCaseOther
Silverstone Strider Essentials 400W Silverstone Milo ML03B Hauppage WinTV 1250 
  hide details  
post #360 of 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoleras View Post

Again, you don't understand how eDP achieves those power savings. It achieves such by lowering the refresh rate of the panel depending on your battery life.
Wrong. Actually eDP for Vblank holds a static frame in the monitor memory and frees up other resources or rather reduces their workload and power consumption. Therefore the laptop in the example would just hold the static frame and not refresh until a new different frame is rendered by the laptop. You have no clue how this works do you. Look it up, I did as soon as the first article broke. The eDP is not the actual tech that applies to G-sync but the basis that allows for it to work.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [AnandTech] AMD FreeSync.