Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [TR] Nvidia responds to AMD's ''free sync'' demo
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[TR] Nvidia responds to AMD's ''free sync'' demo - Page 13  

post #121 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by erocker View Post

What I read:

Nvidia: "Buy our stuff"

That's it.

What I did:

Me: *Throws wallet at Asus and Nvidia*

That's it.

/cry's silently in the corner over the $2400 spent on two 780 Tis and a new Asus display.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockofclay View Post

So I've done some googling, and found that at least some of the 27' korean panels use the dp628 edp chip. This does not support PSR (Panel Self Refresh), which I believe is the feature required to enable freesync. Could the AMD rep clarify?

After some more searching, it seems parade, the manufacturers of the catleap edp chip, also do the DP633/643/653 chips which do support PSR. If you're opening your monitors and you see one of these on the circuit board on the back of the panel, let me know.

Hmm, it looks like those chips only go up to 1080p. A chip that supports 1440 vertical res and PSR is probably a rare beastie.

Which is partly why Asus had to develop this new TN panel, to suit the needs of the display because it really didn't exist.
Edited by PostalTwinkie - 1/8/14 at 6:07pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 5820K AsRock Extreme6 X99 Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti Windforce OC 16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 EVO 250GB - HDD Speed Edtition Samsung SM951 512 GB - I still hate Samsung!  Noctua NHD14 Windows 10 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Achieva Shimian QH270-Lite Overlord Computer Tempest X27OC  Acer Predator XB270HU Filco Majestouch 2 Ninja 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-1250 Fractal Design R5 Razer Naga Razer Goliathus Alpha 
AudioAudio
AKG K702 65th Anniversary Edition Creative Sound Blaster Zx 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 5820K AsRock Extreme6 X99 Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti Windforce OC 16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 EVO 250GB - HDD Speed Edtition Samsung SM951 512 GB - I still hate Samsung!  Noctua NHD14 Windows 10 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Achieva Shimian QH270-Lite Overlord Computer Tempest X27OC  Acer Predator XB270HU Filco Majestouch 2 Ninja 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-1250 Fractal Design R5 Razer Naga Razer Goliathus Alpha 
AudioAudio
AKG K702 65th Anniversary Edition Creative Sound Blaster Zx 
  hide details  
post #122 of 321
Eh, seeing as I only have a GTX 460 and a Phenom 1055T (but oce'ed to 3.8 GHz, thankfully), I really have no use for a super fancy monitor. Its too bad that AMD is relying on the standard, but it was pretty good marketing for the masses, even if deceitful.
post #123 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by senna89 View Post

REQUIRED A MONITOR WITH VARIABLE VBLANK SUPPORT, and any of the best monitors actually in the shop now have this, so also FreeSynch required a feature.

What is the problem of GSynch ? The cost of the extra hardware ? Are you afraid to spend 100$ ?
GSynch i think will be better like running and will have a best support of games than a software solution.

They're trying to sell you something that should and could be free. That is the problem.

The requirement objection you raise is invalid. You're missing the whole point. DP 1.3 is going to have this be an optional feature. Since interest was generated by nVidia for this sort of solution and people have been very receptive, AMD has decided to try and popularize this optional feature of DP 1.3. If customers overwhelmingly desire it, DP 1.3 controllers will be more likely to be designed with variable sync as a supported feature. It becomes a defacto requirement even if it isn't a requirement by specification. If this happens, suddenly most of the controllers on the market will support the feature and it's available to everybody. It isn't a special chip that would be required to enable it--everything would just support it by default. Thus, it's available without any special hardware and without any feature tax being kicked back to nVidia. For this plan to work, interest has to be generated NOW before the controllers are all designed and enter production. By its very nature this NEEDS to happen before the standard is finished.

If anyone doesn't understand this, I'm not sure how it could be better explained. It's a very simple concept.
post #124 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle View Post

They're trying to sell you something that should and could be free. That is the problem.

The requirement objection you raise is invalid. You're missing the whole point. DP 1.3 is going to have this be an optional feature. Since interest was generated by nVidia for this sort of solution and people have been very receptive, AMD has decided to try and popularize this optional feature of DP 1.3. If customers overwhelmingly desire it, DP 1.3 controllers will be more likely to be designed with variable sync as a supported feature. It becomes a defacto requirement even if it isn't a requirement by specification. If this happens, suddenly most of the controllers on the market will support the feature and it's available to everybody. It isn't a special chip that would be required to enable it--everything would just support it by default. Thus, it's available without any special hardware and without any feature tax being kicked back to nVidia. For this plan to work, interest has to be generated NOW before the controllers are all designed and enter production. By its very nature this NEEDS to happen before the standard is finished.

If anyone doesn't understand this, I'm not sure how it could be better explained. It's a very simple concept.
My god gratz on understanding the truth of the matter. I was beginning to think I was the only one. Of course they have been told this and you see how well that has been met.

+1 by the way.
post #125 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle View Post

They're trying to sell you something that should and could be free. That is the problem.

The requirement objection you raise is invalid. You're missing the whole point. DP 1.3 is going to have this be an optional feature. Since interest was generated by nVidia for this sort of solution and people have been very receptive, AMD has decided to try and popularize this optional feature of DP 1.3. If customers overwhelmingly desire it, DP 1.3 controllers will be more likely to be designed with variable sync as a supported feature. It becomes a defacto requirement even if it isn't a requirement by specification. If this happens, suddenly most of the controllers on the market will support the feature and it's available to everybody. It isn't a special chip that would be required to enable it--everything would just support it by default. Thus, it's available without any special hardware and without any feature tax being kicked back to nVidia. For this plan to work, interest has to be generated NOW before the controllers are all designed and enter production. By its very nature this NEEDS to happen before the standard is finished.

If anyone doesn't understand this, I'm not sure how it could be better explained. It's a very simple concept.

That bold part isn't correct.

First, DP 1.3 isn't even finalized. Second, VBlank isn't even required to be part of the final specification, not only is it a POSSIBLE option on DP 1.3, but it is an option to even have it at all in DP 1.3. Just because DP 1.3 is going to be finalized soon, doesn't mean it is going to include the feature of Vblank like eDP does.

On top of this, if VBlank is included in the DP 1.3 final specification, hardware will have to be developed to use it. Currently our GPUs do not support DP 1.3, it would require new GPUs to be purchased, that support DP 1.3, drivers for those GPUs to support VBlank, the display to support DP 1.3 and have the ASIC (chip) that handles it.

ABSOLUTE BEST CASE SCENARIO!

DisplayPort 1.3 is finalized WITH the VBlank option in it.
Users have to purchase new monitors that support it AND new GPUs that support DP 1.3!
Edited by PostalTwinkie - 1/8/14 at 6:39pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 5820K AsRock Extreme6 X99 Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti Windforce OC 16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 EVO 250GB - HDD Speed Edtition Samsung SM951 512 GB - I still hate Samsung!  Noctua NHD14 Windows 10 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Achieva Shimian QH270-Lite Overlord Computer Tempest X27OC  Acer Predator XB270HU Filco Majestouch 2 Ninja 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-1250 Fractal Design R5 Razer Naga Razer Goliathus Alpha 
AudioAudio
AKG K702 65th Anniversary Edition Creative Sound Blaster Zx 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 5820K AsRock Extreme6 X99 Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti Windforce OC 16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 EVO 250GB - HDD Speed Edtition Samsung SM951 512 GB - I still hate Samsung!  Noctua NHD14 Windows 10 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Achieva Shimian QH270-Lite Overlord Computer Tempest X27OC  Acer Predator XB270HU Filco Majestouch 2 Ninja 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-1250 Fractal Design R5 Razer Naga Razer Goliathus Alpha 
AudioAudio
AKG K702 65th Anniversary Edition Creative Sound Blaster Zx 
  hide details  
post #126 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by PostalTwinkie View Post

That bold part isn't correct.

First, DP 1.3 isn't even finalized. Second, VBlank isn't even required to be part of the final specification, not only is it a POSSIBLE option on DP 1.3, but it is an option to even have it at all in DP 1.3. Just because DP 1.3 is going to be finalized soon, doesn't mean it is going to include the feature of Vblank like eDP does.

On top of this, if VBlank is included in the DP 1.3 final specification, hardware will have to be developed to use it. Currently our GPUs do not support DP 1.3, it would require new GPUs to be purchased, that support DP 1.3, drivers for those GPUs to support VBlank, the display to support DP 1.3 and have the ASIC (chip) that handles it.

ABSOLUTE BEST CASE SCENARIO!

DisplayPort 1.3 is finalized WITH the VBlank option in it.
Users have to purchase new monitors that support it AND new GPUs that support DP 1.3!
Ok this is what is wrong in this thread. Each of you argue extremes and act as if your assumption is correct. The not finalized is mentioned in their post as a defacto and maybe passing over a standard as a desired consumer component. Stop being superior and have a civil debate with rational and reasonable discussion points.
post #127 of 321
PSR is already included on many eDP receiver chips. eDP reciever chips are in the majority of LCD panels these days. The problem is getting desktop eDP chips to support PSR mode. It wont require a new chip, just a feature on a chip that is already in there. Why would they need another ASIC?

Amd have stated that all their cards can support this feature for the past 3 generations. This isn't 100% clear, and I would really like the rep to clear it up.

It looks as though PSR WILL be a feature of DP1.3, just a optional one just as Particle stated. I don't see why they would remove it off the list at this late stage. The only thing I could see being changed is PSR being made mandatory.
post #128 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durquavian View Post


Ok this is what is wrong in this thread. Each of you argue extremes and act as if your assumption is correct. The not finalized is mentioned in their post as a defacto and maybe passing over a standard as a desired consumer component. Stop being superior and have a civil debate with rational and reasonable discussion points.

 

He isn't even arguing an extreme, nor is he acting superior in any way. He is just pointing out facts, not even assumptions like many have in this thread. That is what exists right now, and no one can change it at this second.

 

And honestly, he has been probably the single most civil person in this thread.

post #129 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinaesthetic View Post

He isn't even arguing an extreme, nor is he acting superior in any way. He is just pointing out facts, not even assumptions like many have in this thread. That is what exists right now, and no one can change it at this second.

And honestly, he has been probably the single most civil person in this thread.
Wrong. He is arguing the standard only = one extreme. The other was talikg of the big picture = the standard and consumer input and possible outcome from consumer need. A much broader all encompassing point. The standard in no way means that no monitor manufacturer will make some parts of DP1.3, whether ratified or not, a functional part of their equipment. More so because AMD says that they already have support. The ratification of DP1.3 or any part has absolutely nothing to do with the end result other than making it easier or not.

That is my point. They made a completely valid claim. Of course so did twinkie so far as fact but in accordance to the post before, irrelevant.
post #130 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockofclay View Post

PSR is already included on many eDP receiver chips. eDP reciever chips are in the majority of LCD panels these days. The problem is getting desktop eDP chips to support PSR mode. It wont require a new chip, just a feature on a chip that is already in there. Why would they need another ASIC?

Amd have stated that all their cards can support this feature for the past 3 generations. This isn't 100% clear, and I would really like the rep to clear it up.

It looks as though PSR WILL be a feature of DP1.3, just a optional one just as Particle stated. I don't see why they would remove it off the list at this late stage. The only thing I could see being changed is PSR being made mandatory.

This is the confusing and interesting bit, at least for some people.....

The card itself can support it, and has, even Nvidia cards have supported it for years. It is a matter of drivers being written for it, the Nvidia Quadros have it, the consumer line currently has it disabled.

Now here is the interesting part.....

The card supports it, but the interface on the cards don't. Confused yet?

I looked into the idea of a DP 1.2 device being upgraded to DP 1.3 via software, and everything I found pointed to a "No". That to use DP 1.3, and its features, requires the yet unfinished DP 1.3 port. Even though the GPU itself can support the feature, the interface on the card itself can't!

As I said in a previous post today about this, that might not be entirely correct, as information on it is extremely limited.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durquavian View Post

Wrong. He is arguing the standard only = one extreme. The other was talikg of the big picture = the standard and consumer input and possible outcome from consumer need. A much broader all encompassing point. The standard in no way means that no monitor manufacturer will make some parts of DP1.3, whether ratified or not, a functional part of their equipment. More so because AMD says that they already have support. The ratification of DP1.3 or any part has absolutely nothing to do with the end result other than making it easier or not.

That is my point. They made a completely valid claim. Of course so did twinkie so far as fact but in accordance to the post before, irrelevant.

I wasn't arguing an extreme at all, I simply stated the facts (which you don't seem to like) as they currently are. In fact, I gave the best of scenarios for FreeSync, a situation where it is widely adopted as an industry standard. I then followed that with what it would require as an end user to take advantage of.

Please, you seemed to be missing some very simple and basic facts, go back and re-read what I said.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 5820K AsRock Extreme6 X99 Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti Windforce OC 16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 EVO 250GB - HDD Speed Edtition Samsung SM951 512 GB - I still hate Samsung!  Noctua NHD14 Windows 10 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Achieva Shimian QH270-Lite Overlord Computer Tempest X27OC  Acer Predator XB270HU Filco Majestouch 2 Ninja 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-1250 Fractal Design R5 Razer Naga Razer Goliathus Alpha 
AudioAudio
AKG K702 65th Anniversary Edition Creative Sound Blaster Zx 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 5820K AsRock Extreme6 X99 Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti Windforce OC 16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 EVO 250GB - HDD Speed Edtition Samsung SM951 512 GB - I still hate Samsung!  Noctua NHD14 Windows 10 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Achieva Shimian QH270-Lite Overlord Computer Tempest X27OC  Acer Predator XB270HU Filco Majestouch 2 Ninja 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-1250 Fractal Design R5 Razer Naga Razer Goliathus Alpha 
AudioAudio
AKG K702 65th Anniversary Edition Creative Sound Blaster Zx 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [TR] Nvidia responds to AMD's ''free sync'' demo