Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Monitors and Displays › [Hardware.fr] AMD FreeSync ': Proposal adopted by VESA
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Hardware.fr] AMD FreeSync ': Proposal adopted by VESA - Page 10

post #91 of 422
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mand12 View Post

Worth pointing out that with over 50% of GPU consumer market share, making G-Sync require Nvidia cards does, actually, make it work out for the majority of consumers.

But that's irrelevant. What's relevant is that no, you're not entitled to new tech for free. Nvidia is entitled to charge for their development effort, and they're also entitled to prevent their competition from reaping the benefits of their work.

People have said that this is bad for the consumer, but it's actually -GOOD- for us to have proprietary things. Because if Nvidia couldn't make it proprietary, couldn't use it to extend their market share, couldn't use it to move their GPUs, what's their incentive to spend the money and time developing it in the first place? Nobody else was moving toward variable refresh until Nvidia came out with an actual implementation, and placed it in our hands.

If all you want is both companies giving us a new hunk of silicon with a handful more transistors on it every couple years in exchange for several hundred bucks, then by all means, continue to give Nvidia crap for making G-Sync proprietary. If you want them to take risks on actually innovative things, giving us tech we didn't have before, then yes, crack open your wallet and stop being so damn stingy about it.
A huge chunk of nvidia's market share runs on their lower mid-tier gpus which means they definitely can't afford a G-sync monitor so there's really no talk about a majority of consumers benefitting here. And no, I disagree, propreitary tech isn't always good for the consumer unless by us you mean Nvidia in which case I'd understand. I already acknowledged the financial/business benefits so you don't need to lecture me on that. And with that said, if I really wanted g-sync, I'd have kept my 780 classy and bought a kit a long time ago but I'd rather have a display with vivid and sharp colors with some input lag than a crappy TN display with variable refresh rate.
Gaming Rig
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-4670K Asrock Z87 Extreme6 Powercolor RX 480 G-skill Ripjaws x-series  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Adata SPG 900X adata 120GB Antec H2O 620 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
MG279Q 27inch free sync CM Storm quickfire Seasonic 650W Fractal Design R5 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G502 ZERO Sennheiser PC-363D 
  hide details  
Reply
Gaming Rig
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-4670K Asrock Z87 Extreme6 Powercolor RX 480 G-skill Ripjaws x-series  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Adata SPG 900X adata 120GB Antec H2O 620 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
MG279Q 27inch free sync CM Storm quickfire Seasonic 650W Fractal Design R5 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G502 ZERO Sennheiser PC-363D 
  hide details  
Reply
post #92 of 422
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PostalTwinkie View Post

Two bold parts I added, removed one of yours for clarity....

Variable refresh rate, regardless of form, doesn't benefit all consumers. It benefits laptop users by lowering the power usage of the display itself increasing the battery life. It then benefits gamers, who have to deal with frame rate fluctuations while gaming. No one else benefits from VRR, no one. This isn't a push to the masses as people seem to think, it is a push towards a very specific market in the desktop world, and that would be gamers.

Second part...

Not affordable? Please, do entertain me on this. How is a $150 add-on to displays via a DIY not affordable? For Christ's sake we have people spending $2,000 on just GPUs! Even the displays on the market that have it built in are going to be arriving at the $400 to $800 range. Which is a hell of a deal considering how long people keep their displays, which I believe the average is 5 years on a display.

So the "affordability" argument doesn't fly at all. We have people spending hundreds to thousands PER YEAR on just a GPU setup, so $400 to $800 for a ~5 year product is more than worth it, and more than affordable.

EDIT: Another point on cost; you can easily drop $150 on just video game purchases per year as a gamer, that is 3 major title purchases at their launch, that is it.
Are you really serious? You do know that most PC gamers run on mid-tier hardware. Because you are able to spend $2000 on a gaming PC doesn't mean everyone else can.
Gaming Rig
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-4670K Asrock Z87 Extreme6 Powercolor RX 480 G-skill Ripjaws x-series  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Adata SPG 900X adata 120GB Antec H2O 620 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
MG279Q 27inch free sync CM Storm quickfire Seasonic 650W Fractal Design R5 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G502 ZERO Sennheiser PC-363D 
  hide details  
Reply
Gaming Rig
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-4670K Asrock Z87 Extreme6 Powercolor RX 480 G-skill Ripjaws x-series  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Adata SPG 900X adata 120GB Antec H2O 620 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
MG279Q 27inch free sync CM Storm quickfire Seasonic 650W Fractal Design R5 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G502 ZERO Sennheiser PC-363D 
  hide details  
Reply
post #93 of 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mand12 View Post

And with that said, if I really wanted g-sync, I'd have kept my 780 classy and bought a kit a long time ago but I'd rather have a display with vivid and sharp colors with some input lag than a crappy TN display with variable refresh rate.
why are you in this thread, if you're not interested by the motion portrayal quality of a display?
Edited by Hasty - 4/5/14 at 4:43pm
post #94 of 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobiman View Post

Are you really serious? You do know that most PC gamers run on mid-tier hardware. Because you are able to spend $2000 on a gaming PC doesn't mean everyone else can.

Even on the low end a gamer is going to be spending $600 just for a basic system, hell even a console runs in that range.

So, yes, I am serious. You try to make the affordability argument, when gamers spend FAR more on hardware than the cost of a DIY. So deal with it.
    
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  
Reply
    
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  
Reply
post #95 of 422
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hasty View Post

what are you in this thread, if you're not interested by the motion portrayal quality of a display?
Did you mean to say, "what am I doing"? Well, first of all, I never said I wasn't for it, so don't put words in my mouth. Motion portrayal quality isn't the most important ingredent for enjoying a game and I prefer AMD's approach compared to Nvidia's. Do you have a problem with this?
Gaming Rig
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-4670K Asrock Z87 Extreme6 Powercolor RX 480 G-skill Ripjaws x-series  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Adata SPG 900X adata 120GB Antec H2O 620 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
MG279Q 27inch free sync CM Storm quickfire Seasonic 650W Fractal Design R5 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G502 ZERO Sennheiser PC-363D 
  hide details  
Reply
Gaming Rig
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-4670K Asrock Z87 Extreme6 Powercolor RX 480 G-skill Ripjaws x-series  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Adata SPG 900X adata 120GB Antec H2O 620 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
MG279Q 27inch free sync CM Storm quickfire Seasonic 650W Fractal Design R5 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G502 ZERO Sennheiser PC-363D 
  hide details  
Reply
post #96 of 422
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PostalTwinkie View Post

Even on the low end a gamer is going to be spending $600 just for a basic system, hell even a console runs in that range.

So, yes, I am serious. You try to make the affordability argument, when gamers spend FAR more on hardware than the cost of a DIY. So deal with it.
I already did and voted with my wallet a long time ago.
Gaming Rig
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-4670K Asrock Z87 Extreme6 Powercolor RX 480 G-skill Ripjaws x-series  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Adata SPG 900X adata 120GB Antec H2O 620 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
MG279Q 27inch free sync CM Storm quickfire Seasonic 650W Fractal Design R5 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G502 ZERO Sennheiser PC-363D 
  hide details  
Reply
Gaming Rig
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-4670K Asrock Z87 Extreme6 Powercolor RX 480 G-skill Ripjaws x-series  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Adata SPG 900X adata 120GB Antec H2O 620 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
MG279Q 27inch free sync CM Storm quickfire Seasonic 650W Fractal Design R5 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G502 ZERO Sennheiser PC-363D 
  hide details  
Reply
post #97 of 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobiman View Post

Did you meant to say, "what am I doing"? Well, first of all, I never said I wasn't for it, so don't put words in my mouth. Motion portrayal quality isn't the most important ingredent for enjoying a game and I prefer AMD's approach compared to Nvidia's. Do you have a problem with this?
I've got a problem when a thread about an interesting technology becomes polluted by debates about brands. If you're not interested in variable refresh rate, then this thread is not for you.
post #98 of 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by BinaryDemon View Post

Yes but seriously this is how it SHOULD be done. If Nvidia could have patented this technology, I'm sure they would have.
What makes you think Nvidia didn't patent this technology?

It take a minimum of 1 1/2 years (and often much longer) from the initial original patent filing for it to appear on the USPTO website as a patent application. And then another 3 to 5 years for it to become approved.

If Nvidia started working on this less than 3 years ago, and started filing patents after, say, 1 year of work, you're not going to find anything at all in the USPTO website today.

This technology is revolutionary for gamers. No technology company will come up with such a thing and NOT file patents about it, irrespective of what exists in specifications.

It's also totally naive to think that Vblank stretching is all there is to G-SYNC or FreeSync. Yeah, that's the first order that's needed. But it's similar to saying that all you need to have a car is an engine and 4 wheels. There are literally hundreds of thousands of patents in the automobile space that got the state of art from a steam machine to where we are now. The same is true for any modern technology: there are so many details that need to be right before it can be commercialized. And all those details can, and usually are, patented. I expect no less for this idea.
post #99 of 422
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hasty View Post

I've got a problem when a thread about an interesting technology becomes polluted by debates about brands. If you're not interested in variable refresh rate, then this thread is not for you.
I don't know if you have a reading comprehension problem or not but nobody here is debating about brands. We are debating about how each company has chosen to go about solving the problem of variable refresh rate, which, IIRC, is what this thread is about and I would know because I posted it.
Gaming Rig
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-4670K Asrock Z87 Extreme6 Powercolor RX 480 G-skill Ripjaws x-series  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Adata SPG 900X adata 120GB Antec H2O 620 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
MG279Q 27inch free sync CM Storm quickfire Seasonic 650W Fractal Design R5 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G502 ZERO Sennheiser PC-363D 
  hide details  
Reply
Gaming Rig
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-4670K Asrock Z87 Extreme6 Powercolor RX 480 G-skill Ripjaws x-series  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Adata SPG 900X adata 120GB Antec H2O 620 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
MG279Q 27inch free sync CM Storm quickfire Seasonic 650W Fractal Design R5 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G502 ZERO Sennheiser PC-363D 
  hide details  
Reply
post #100 of 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobiman View Post

I don't know if you have a reading comprehension problem or not but nobody here is debating about brands. We are debating about how each company has chosen to go about solving the problem of variable refresh rate, which, IIRC, is what this thread is about and I would know because I posted it.

What I see in your posts are considerations about brands. Who invented it? Who is claiming it? As shown in your second post in this thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobiman View Post

From the way I see it, AMD has done what they can do from a cost effective stand point. They pushed for dp 1.2a to be a standard so it'll be easier for all display manufacturers to adopt without having to worry about incompatibility. There's not much else to be done here since current gpus are believed to work with dp 1.2a. The technology already exists so Nvidia didn't invent nothing. All we need to get the ball rolling is more displays that come with dp 1.2a capability since it's not yet a standard and in some few cases firmware upgrades for already existing displays with dp 1.2.
See, I have no problem with nvidia bringing this tech to light but what ticks me off is that Nvidia is claming to have done a ton of work in order for this to work when all they've actually done is ensure it only works with their hardware.

Seriously who cares?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Monitors and Displays
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Monitors and Displays › [Hardware.fr] AMD FreeSync ': Proposal adopted by VESA