Overclock.net banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

25K views 321 replies 83 participants last post by  AlDyer  
#1 ·
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Variable-Refresh-FreeSync-Could-Be-Alternative-NVIDIA-G-Sync
Quote:
All that is needed for this to work, as AMD explained it, was an eDP connection between the discrete GPU and the display, a controller for the screen that understands the variable refresh rate methods of eDP 1.0 specifications and an updated AMD driver to properly send it the signals. The panel can communicate that it supports this variable refresh technology to the graphics card through the EDID as resolutions and timings are communicated today and then the graphics driver would know to send the varying vblank signals to adjust panel refresh times on the fly.

If you aren't familiar with eDP, don't feel bad. It's a connection type used in tablets and notebooks and isn't used at all in desktop configurations (some all-in-one designs do use eDP). But here is where it might get interesting: the upcoming DisplayPort 1.3 standard actually includes the same variable refresh rate specification. That means that upcoming DP 1.3 panels COULD support variable refresh technology in an identical way to what we saw demoed with the Toshiba laptops today. DP 1.3 is on schedule to be ratified as a standard in the next 60-90 days and from there we'll have some unknown wait time before we begin to see monitors using DP 1.3 technology in them.
http://techreport.com/news/25878/nvidia-responds-to-amd-free-sync-demo
Quote:
He first said, of course, that he was excited to see his competitor taking an interest in dynamic refresh rates and thinking that the technology could offer benefits for gamers. In his view, AMD interest was validation of Nvidia's work in this area.

However, Petersen quickly pointed out an important detail about AMD's "free sync" demo: it was conducted on laptop systems. Laptops, he explained, have a different display architecture than desktops, with a more direct interface between the GPU and the LCD panel, generally based on standards like LVDS or eDP (embedded DisplayPort). Desktop monitors use other interfaces, like HDMI and DisplayPort, and typically have a scaler chip situated in the path between the GPU and the panel. As a result, a feature like variable refresh is nearly impossible to implement on a desktop monitor as things now stand.
Article has some additional points such as what AMD expects to happen for Freesync to be adopted and when DP 1.3 will be released.

You will have to go back later to PCper to find out what desktop displays have the prototypes for DP 1.3 already implemented because this info is hard to pin down even for AMD.
 
#2 ·
Then the commercial monitor produtcs with FreeSynch support not exist yet.
Support to the tecnology is required like Gsynch.

I Thinked Free Synch was supported by all monitors, almost the modern models, another epic fail by AMD.
mad.gif
 
#3 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by senna89 View Post

Then the commercial monitor produtcs with FreeSynch support not exist yet.
Support to the tecnology is required like Gsynch.

I Thinked Free Synch was supported by all monitors, almost the modern models, another epic fail by AMD.
mad.gif
How the hell is it an AMD fail? It was forum hype that made it sound like it was supported by all monitors, not AMD themselves. All AMD said was that they were able to use vblank, which is a part of VESA standards, to do variable refresh rates.

Whether or not it really is a fail depends on how much it costs to implement, and how it performs compared to G-sync.
 
#4 ·
More to the point, what this simply requires is that the companies moving forward implement the new displayport standard for it to function. It's probably not going to be retroactively supported, no, but it's also not like Freesync requires the monitor manufacturers to partner up with AMD for their proprietary hardware.
rolleyes.gif


As long as it follows the standards set by VESA and includes the correct DisplayPort version Freesync should work with most monitors, far as I understand this.
 
#5 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by senna89 View Post

Then the commercial monitor produtcs with FreeSynch support not exist yet.
Support to the tecnology is required like Gsynch.

I Thinked Free Synch was supported by all monitors, almost the modern models, another epic fail by AMD.
mad.gif
Others beat me to it:
How is this a fail? Seriously ignorant.

If anything this is an nvidia fail due to the fact that they are selling people display controllers and displays with modified controllers to support somthing that appearently will be supported by DEFAULT when DP 1.3 hits...

EDIT: And limiting it to THEIR GPUs to boot!
 
#6 ·
There has been no evidence that freesync improves vsync input lag. In the demos they had vsync enabled on both monitors and one with freesync and one without. If it requires extra equipment AND still doesn't fix input lag, then it's worthless to me.
 
Save
#7 ·
Quote:
He first said, of course, that he was excited to see his competitor taking an interest in dynamic refresh rates and thinking that the technology could offer benefits for gamers. In his view, AMD interest was validation of Nvidia's work in this area.

However, Petersen quickly pointed out an important detail about AMD's "free sync" demo: it was conducted on laptop systems. Laptops, he explained, have a different display architecture than desktops, with a more direct interface between the GPU and the LCD panel, generally based on standards like LVDS or eDP (embedded DisplayPort). Desktop monitors use other interfaces, like HDMI and DisplayPort, and typically have a scaler chip situated in the path between the GPU and the panel. As a result, a feature like variable refresh is nearly impossible to implement on a desktop monitor as things now stand.
Source
 
Save
#10 ·
Very interesting, although didn't some article say that certain cables do work? I don't really care about all this sync tech, but I guess it is a nice feature to have. I have never had any issues with tearing and I don't use Vsync because it causes horrible input lag
 
#13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by drunkenvalley View Post

And now we've got a third thread on the first page discussing this topic.
thinking.gif


eDP is different from what we've got, yes. However, DisplayPort 1.3 is expected to have the features that Freesync requires.
Interesting statement. I have had no problems running eDP screens from a regular displayport output on various desktop GPU's, to name few an old 6770 from AMD, and from 7xxx series a 7870 and 7950 cards. The screens I have used were the ipad 3 "retina" ones with a little additional circuitry for the backlight control but the displayport signal itself was just straight pass-through without any modifications.

LDVS is ofc a bit trikier thing to do. There: http://www.overclock.net/t/1389756/custom-screen-31-3600x1600-cost-250/0_50 - is some additional reeading with quite a lot of details about what and how people do it.
 
#14 ·
Open source solution usually lose against marketing payment solutions like HD3D vs 3D Vision !!!
Monitors with this vesa formatt support not introduce any news / certification to the product, Gsynch is totally different.

Free Synch is not for all but required some spec and cable for run and i dont know how will be the support in games.

Free Synch will be a succesfull if i can be use it in all monitors but like this i buy G-synch ( better, sure functionality and sure better games support ).
Do you want to speak about the price ? +100$ for you is a drama ? buy a console !
 
#15 ·
Quote:
CES - On the show floor here at CES today, I spoke briefly with Nvidia's Tom Petersen, the executive instrumental in the development of G-Sync technology, about the AMD "free sync" demo we reported on yesterday. Alongside the demo, a senior AMD engineering executive asserted that a variable refresh rate capability like G-Sync ought to be possible essentially for free, without adding any extra costs to a display or a PC system. Peterson had several things to say in response to AMD's demo and claims.

He first said, of course, that he was excited to see his competitor taking an interest in dynamic refresh rates and thinking that the technology could offer benefits for gamers. In his view, AMD interest was validation of Nvidia's work in this area.

However, Petersen quickly pointed out an important detail about AMD's "free sync" demo: it was conducted on laptop systems. Laptops, he explained, have a different display architecture than desktops, with a more direct interface between the GPU and the LCD panel, generally based on standards like LVDS or eDP (embedded DisplayPort). Desktop monitors use other interfaces, like HDMI and DisplayPort, and typically have a scaler chip situated in the path between the GPU and the panel. As a result, a feature like variable refresh is nearly impossible to implement on a desktop monitor as things now stand.

That, Petersen explained, is why Nvidia decided to create its G-Sync module, which replaces the scaler ASIC with logic of Nvidia's own creation. To his knowledge, no scaler ASIC with variable refresh capability exists-and if it did, he said, "we would know." Nvidia's intent in building the G-Sync module was to enable this capability and thus to nudge the industry in the right direction.

When asked about a potential VESA standard to enable dynamic refresh rates, Petersen had something very interesting to say: he doesn't think it's necessary, because DisplayPort already supports "everything required" for dynamic refresh rates via the extension of the vblank interval. That's why, he noted, G-Sync works with existing cables without the need for any new standards. Nvidia sees no need and has no plans to approach VESA about a new standard for G-Sync-style functionality-because it already exists.

That said, Nvidia won't enable G-Sync for competing graphics chips because it has invested real time and effort in building a good solution and doesn't intend to "do the work for everyone." If the competition wants to have a similar feature in its products, Petersen said, "They have to do the work. They have to hire the guys to figure it out."

This sentiment is a familiar one coming from Nvidia. The company tends to view its GeForce GPUs and related solutions as a platform, much like the Xbox One or PS4. Although Nvidia participates in the larger PC gaming ecosystem, it has long been guarded about letting its competitors reap the benefits of its work in various areas, from GPU computing to PhysX to software enablement of advanced rendering techniques in AAA games.

Like it or not, there is a certain competitive wisdom in not handing off the fruits of your work to your competition free of charge. That's not, however, how big PC players like Intel and AMD have traditionally handled new standards like USB and x86-64. (Intel in particular has done a lot of work "for everyone.")

If you recall our report from yesterday on this subject, Nvidia and AMD do seem to agree on some of the key issues here. Both firms have told us that the technology to support variable refresh rates exists in some cases already. Both have said that the biggest challenge to widespread adoption of the tech on the desktop is support among panel (and scaler ASIC) makers. They tend to disagree on the best means of pushing variable refresh tech into wider adoption. Obviously, after looking at the landscape, Nvidia chose to build the G-Sync module and enable the feature itself.

My sense is that AMD will likely work with the existing scaler ASIC makers and monitor makers, attempting to persuade them to support dynamic refresh rates in their hardware. Now that Nvidia has made a splash with G-Sync, AMD could find this path easier simply because monitor makers may be more willing to add a feature with obvious consumer appeal. We'll have to see how long it takes for "free sync" solutions to come to market. We've seen a number of G-Sync-compatible monitors announced here at CES, and most of them are expected to hit store shelves in the second quarter of 2014.
This is what AMD's chief graphics engineer, Kodjuri, stated:
Quote:
Koduri told me that AMD wasn't bringing this demo out to rain on NVIDIA's G-Sync parade but instead to get media interested in learning about this feature of eDP 1.0 and DP 1.3, urging the hardware companies responsible to more quickly produce the necessary controllers and integrate them with upcoming panels in 2014.
Source:
http://techreport.com/news/25878/nvidia-responds-to-amd-free-sync-demo
 
#16 ·
TLDR: This requires displayport 1.3 or eDP 1.0. eDP 1.0 is only on laptops. No monitors support DP 1.3 yet.

AMD has to convince monitor manufacturers to use DP 1.3 and add firmware supporting variable vblank. In other words, don't expect free-sync this year. And free-sync isn't free, apparently.
 
#18 ·
Here we go again. I will leave this post and wait to see who's sync is what, better, and then fully implemented as standard - I gotta a long wait
rolleyes.gif
 
Save
#19 ·
Wow so AMD and Nvidia are both showing this stuff off now and making people buy new displays?
tongue.gif
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by senna89 View Post

Then the commercial monitor produtcs with FreeSynch support not exist yet.
Support to the tecnology is required like Gsynch.

I Thinked Free Synch was supported by all monitors, almost the modern models, another epic fail by AMD.
mad.gif
AMD is generating interest in an optional feature of DP 1.3 that will likely encourage the feature to be widely exposed in later monitors. No special hardware or licensing will be required, unlike nVidia's proprietary solution. Where you see failure, it seems just about everyone else sees leadership that will benefit all customers.

--

As a general observation not directed toward the poster quoted, hasn't "epic" lost all meaning by this point? People would describe a good bowl of ramen noodles as being epic these days after all.
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle View Post

AMD is generating interest in an optional feature of DP 1.3 that will likely encourage the feature to be widely exposed in later monitors.
Don't take this the wrong way (since I really wanted to say this ever since I read where an AMD rep basically said the same thing), but ...

If you believe that all AMD was doing was to generate interest in Display Port 1.3, then I have a bridge to sell people.

AMD did this to DIRECTLY try to counter nVidia G-Sync. AMD could care less about the Display Port standard, which has yet to be finalized. Nor does it care to help develop the new ASIC that will have to be put into monitors to make this all work.

The only thing "Free" about "FreeSync" is that AMD won't/can't charge money for a standard that isn't theirs and for an ASIC that they didn't develop (nor has anyone developed yet).

The Display Port 1.3 standard hasn't even been finalized, and it isn't even a sure thing that variable refresh rates will be in the standard.

Simply put, all this demo was is a very rough "Proof of concept" demo to counter G-Sync, which already has EVERYTHING lined up and monitors being produced (and not just a couple laptop displays that use eDP). nVidia is WAY AHEAD on this, and AMD is once again playing "catch up". If the Display Port 1.3 spec doesn't require variable refresh rates, then "FreeSync" is dead. Even if DP1.3 requires it, then a special ASIC chip will have to be put into the monitors to take advantage of it. Then AMD will have to write a new driver to update their cards (maybe they will get to this after the finish giving support to DirectX 9 games with their anti-stuttering code that they did for DirectX 10 and 11, after nVidia beat them over the head and AMD denied there was a problem for over a year).

Either way, G-Sync or "FreeSync", you will have to buy a new monitor. The difference is, nVidia controls the G-Sync standard and it is moving forward. AMD is hanging their hats (and HOPES) that another groups standard will do what they want and that monitor manufacturers develop the custom ASIC that is required.
 
#22 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle View Post

AMD is generating interest in an optional feature of DP 1.3 that will likely encourage the feature to be widely exposed in later monitors. No special hardware or licensing will be required, unlike nVidia's proprietary solution. Where you see failure, it seems just about everyone else sees leadership that will benefit all customers.

--

As a general observation not directed toward the poster quoted, hasn't "epic" lost all meaning by this point? People would describe a good bowl of ramen noodles as being epic these days after all.
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.
 
#25 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by CriticalHit View Post

Gsync is restricted to nvidia cards
Freesync open to all cards
No, G-Sync isn't restricted to nVidia cards. AMD either has to pay to use the technology or they will have to pay R&D costs to reverse engineer the technology.

Just like how nVidia doesn't get a "free lunch" with Mantle. Yes Mantle will WORK on nVidia cards, but it won't BENEFIT from it ... same with G-Sync. You can use an AMD card on a G-Sync capable monitor, but they won't get any benefit from it.

Bottom line, AMD doesn't get a "free lunch" from G-Sync, and nVidia doesn't get a "free lunch" from Mantle.

Also, since "FreeSync" relies on an as of yet specified feature of an as of yet ratified standard not controlled by AMD (aka Display Port 1.3 and "variable frame rate VBLANK") and also relies on monitor manufacturers to develop an ASIC that will support this, "FreeSync" is little more than a "proof of concept" project right now.

Basically the cobbled together a laptop (because it has eDP, and an ASIC that supports it ... but not all laptops do, and no desktop monitors support eDP) to show a demo to try and steal a tiny bit of thunder from nVidia and several monitor manufacturers who are showing hardware that is due out very soon. To make matters worse, AMD basically flat out lied and said they did it not because they are trying to counter G-Sync, but to support the upcoming Display Port 1.3 standard. I mean come on, EVERYONE knows that is a bald face lie ... so why even make it? Because AMD is playing "catch up" once again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.