Samsung has announced that its first AMD FreeSync-enabled monitors will arrive early next year.
In March 2015, Samsung's UD590 and UE850 Ultra HD (aka 4K) monitors will support FreeSync, AMD's open-source answer to Nvidia's G-Sync technology. Like G-Sync, FreeSync removes tearing and reduces stuttering for a much smoother gaming experience at refresh rates below the monitor's maximum. G-Sync and FreeSync dynamically alter the monitor's refresh rate to match the output of the graphics card.
But unlike G-Sync-a proprietary Nvidia tech that adds roughly $200 to the cost of the monitor, judging by Nvidia's DIY kits-FreeSync uses an open-source protocol that is free for anyone to implement on a compatible monitor. The royalty-free FreeSync works as a modification of the DisplayPort standard with a compatible AMD graphics card.
Which is perfect, because at 4k getting anything above 40fps in current games is tough. Crossfire seems to be able to handle it, but then you have all the problems with microstuttering. The games I've seen with good xfire frame times also don't' scale as well in terms of average fps (which is preferable, but unfortunate).
Micro-stuttering with Crossfire seems to be the case with cards prior to the R9 290(x) as it seems AMD's XDMA is doing its job.Originally Posted by aberrero
Which is perfect, because at 4k getting anything above 40fps in current games is tough. Crossfire seems to be able to handle it, but then you have all the problems with microstuttering. The games I've seen with good xfire frame times also don't' scale as well in terms of average fps (which is preferable, but unfortunate).
Source: LinkIn fact, we concluded that the actual experience of CrossFire feels smoother and more responsive compared to SLI right now. AMD has a leg up with its XDMA technology.
Microstuttering and bad frame times might make an appearance in graphs and benchmarks, but in the real world its essentially negligible. Especially with the 290's and XDMA. But thats just me speaking from experience, others might have a different opinion.Originally Posted by aberrero
Which is perfect, because at 4k getting anything above 40fps in current games is tough. Crossfire seems to be able to handle it, but then you have all the problems with microstuttering. The games I've seen with good xfire frame times also don't' scale as well in terms of average fps (which is preferable, but unfortunate).
It bothered me with SLI back in the day. I know that AMD has worked on it, but it seems to be at the expense of FPS scaling, at least in beyond earth.
Probably need a new monitor unless it only takes a firmware update
Eyefinity I don't know, but there's no reason I'm aware of that it wouldn't work with Crossfire.
It is a dev kit. They had to use a programmable chip on it so that they could make modifications as they continue to make improvements. Future versions should be much cheaper, but without the option to reprogram them.Originally Posted by Thready
"But unlike G-Sync-a proprietary Nvidia tech that adds roughly $200 to the cost of the monitor, judging by Nvidia's DIY kits-FreeSync uses an open-source protocol that is free for anyone to implement on a compatible monitor. The royalty-free FreeSync works as a modification of the DisplayPort standard with a compatible AMD graphics card."
I think Nvidia's cult following is a bit like Apple. I'm sure there are hordes of people just ready to tell me why $200 extra is necessary for the best experience possible.
well look closely at what was actually written in part you quoted. "royalty free" "free for anyone to implement". Not "part of the required standard and already developed". That means someone is going to have to pay to implement this. So yes, gsync costs money but so does "Free"Sync. Claiming that gsync would cost an additional $200 but then not saying how much freesync will cost and in fact strongly implying that freesync is "free" is a load of crock.Originally Posted by Thready
"But unlike G-Sync-a proprietary Nvidia tech that adds roughly $200 to the cost of the monitor, judging by Nvidia's DIY kits-FreeSync uses an open-source protocol that is free for anyone to implement on a compatible monitor. The royalty-free FreeSync works as a modification of the DisplayPort standard with a compatible AMD graphics card."
I think Nvidia's cult following is a bit like Apple. I'm sure there are hordes of people just ready to tell me why $200 extra is necessary for the best experience possible.
I'm hoping FreeSync works out, but you can't really blame them for charging more when there was nothing else to compete against and not wanting to try and get something into the VESA standard.Originally Posted by Thready
"But unlike G-Sync-a proprietary Nvidia tech that adds roughly $200 to the cost of the monitor, judging by Nvidia's DIY kits-FreeSync uses an open-source protocol that is free for anyone to implement on a compatible monitor. The royalty-free FreeSync works as a modification of the DisplayPort standard with a compatible AMD graphics card."
I think Nvidia's cult following is a bit like Apple. I'm sure there are hordes of people just ready to tell me why $200 extra is necessary for the best experience possible.
Negative off the line with eyefinity, must be patient if you want it.
Then I just won't buy freesync either. 3D TVs used to cost a bunch extra and now they come standard in most 47+ inch TVs. I can wait.Originally Posted by deafboy
I'm hoping FreeSync works out, but you can't really blame them for charging more when there was nothing else to compete against and not wanting to try and get something into the VESA standard.
Free for anyone to implement, not free to implement. FreeSync monitors will definitely have a cost increase over non-FreeSync monitors.
is that a actual legit complaint? who cares what its called stop nitpicking, its not like your collecting royalties we're consumers and we are lucky there is competitionOriginally Posted by rcfc89
Does anyone have any links to actual information about these upcoming monitors? All I'm getting so far is the whole coming with FreeSync announcement. Kinda cheesy that Amd used "FreeSync" as the name to knock Nvidia for charging a premium for Gsync. I get it but still cheesy none the less.
Is AMD collecting any revenue that Freesync monitor generate?? Not sure what your talking about of course manufactures have costs lolOriginally Posted by serothis
well look closely at what was actually written in part you quoted. "royalty free" "free for anyone to implement". Not "part of the required standard and already developed". That means someone is going to have to pay to implement this. So yes, gsync costs money but so does "Free"Sync. Claiming that gsync would cost an additional $200 but then not saying how much freesync will cost and in fact strongly implying that freesync is "free" is a load of crock.