[Hardware.fr] AMD FreeSync ': Proposal adopted by VESA - Page 8 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #71 of 422 (permalink) Old 04-05-2014, 10:56 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
pcfoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: 10 TZ from home...
Posts: 3,370
Rep: 261 (Unique: 204)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PostalTwinkie View Post

Oh, I am almost certain this will happen. It will be a feature on "Gaming" displays, because frankly that is the only market that benefits from it. Since it won't be a feature on every display, it will be marked up to recover costs of limited production (compared to a normal display).

Either way, people are getting overly excited about this announcement, and making it out to be some major news. The truth of it is this is just another very small step in a very long walk. It has simply taken FreeSync from a thought on paper to a VERY optional feature of DP.
It is only a game changer for gamers, no other user in the desktop environment benefits from it. The only benefit it provides to laptop users is extending, slightly, battery life by decreasing the total power usage of the panel display. Battery life isn't a concern in the desktop environment, and video playback is at a very fixed rate; so there is no benefit to those situations.

So, what does this mean? Well from the perspective of the manufacturer, why would they spend extra to put a feature in displays that won't benefit their users?

Just for clarity that extra feature is the ASIC required in the panel to make this happen; we see one ASIC on the market via the G-Sync module. Yes, FreeSync will require some form of ASIC as well.

In the end you have a situation of a technology that benefits a handful of your user base, making it less appealing to manufacturers on their normal production displays. This is why it will become a feature on "Gaming" displays, at a premium, and won't be on your normal displays; because usage outside of gaming sees no benefit at all to it!

Or,
The ASIC that will handle the new DP might included it anyways, and it might be way more prominent than you guesstimate, and it might not cost a premium after the first 1-2 models that have it, which premium you have no idea about as that ASIC could be a couple of bucks extra = no real price increase to be noted built into your new multi-100$ monitor, while G-Sync is defacto $150 or more, on a handful of displays, and requires getting your hands dirty on some of them as it is not a built in feature.

Yes, G-Sync is available today, for some monitors, which unless you go for the way more expensive ROG 1440p are a serious compromise for most ppl that don't use them exclusively for gaming.
No, I would not give away my 27" 1440p to get an overpriced "gaming" TN, and then pay more for G-Sync. Why? Cause it is hypocritical diluting the guestimations about a limited target group in case of Free-sync, and swallowing the camel that is called G-Sync.

Freesync's cost and availability is based on a (sounding/reading) pretty biased guesstimation, G-Sync costs is based on facts.

So you, and few others, use a double standard, painting reality in an obvious color.

Writing 20 post per hour about it, doesn't make it any better for G-Sync - which is a great idea, yet niche and pricey and rigged to favor nVidia more than consumers.
Just proves you are picking camps in ways that narrow your objectivity.

[Build Log] the FooBox - Watercooled 540 AIR, and 2700 threads
Forgive my rants - I am harmless - Nullius in verba after all.


pcfoo is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #72 of 422 (permalink) Old 04-05-2014, 11:34 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
kingduqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,209
Rep: 43 (Unique: 37)
No need to get my panties wet until DP 1.3 with variable refresh mandatory and monitors that support it releasing in the market. AKA not even close yet.
kingduqc is offline  
post #73 of 422 (permalink) Old 04-05-2014, 12:14 PM
Linux Lobbyist
 
Kinaesthetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 4,530
Rep: 462 (Unique: 340)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bencher View Post


People will downplay anything from AMD. Even when it makes no sense to.

Lol I find it hilarious.

 

People will downplay anything from Intel/Nvidia. Even when it makes no sense to.

 

Lol I find it hilarious.

 

 


 

 

I really do. Why? Because that statement that you wrote is about the single most hypocritical post I've seen on this forum in the past 4 years. You should NEVER be so biased towards any brand on the market in the first place. They are multi-billion $ companies, where your money is a flat out minuscule drop in the bucket in their earnings. They don't care about you as a person. Only your money, and that you'll give it to them. That is why Nvidia developed the G-Sync tech, to make money. That is why AMD launched the FreeSync campaign, to earn brand awareness to make money.

 

Enjoy the technology. Not the companies involved. Brand bias is what turns half the threads on OCN into garbage material.

 

And that example I made is a statement of how insanely ridiculous your statement sounds from any direction.

 

 

/rant-over.


I hate fanboys/fangirls. You ruin the friendlyshilling atmosphere of OCN./s

 

 

Kinaesthetic is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #74 of 422 (permalink) Old 04-05-2014, 12:33 PM
 
bencher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingduqc View Post

No need to get my panties wet until DP 1.3 with variable refresh mandatory and monitors that support it releasing in the market. AKA not even close yet.
Yes it will probably take a while before we see any of this.
bencher is offline  
post #75 of 422 (permalink) Old 04-05-2014, 12:55 PM
Frog Blast The Vent Core
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 6,036
Rep: 371 (Unique: 184)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redeemer View Post

As long as the technology remain proprietary there will always been a premium

Sure, but it will be less than it is now.
Mand12 is offline  
post #76 of 422 (permalink) Old 04-05-2014, 12:59 PM
Frog Blast The Vent Core
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 6,036
Rep: 371 (Unique: 184)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcfoo View Post

While AMD and whoever supports FreeSync does it for free? There are no R&D and support after launch costs?

AMD is doing nothing. Seriously. FreeSync does not exist, AMD is not actually developing it. AMD said, with their own statement, that they made the demo to encourage display manufacturers to invest in the technology.

There is nothing whatsoever comparable between Nvidia actually getting hardware out the door and into the hands of consumers and AMD sitting back and hoping someone else does the work.

And no, you shouldn't take my word for it, you should take AMD's word for it. Go read their statements on the subject.
Mand12 is offline  
post #77 of 422 (permalink) Old 04-05-2014, 01:11 PM
Frog Blast The Vent Core
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 6,036
Rep: 371 (Unique: 184)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcfoo View Post

Or,
The ASIC that will handle the new DP might included it anyways, and it might be way more prominent than you guesstimate, and it might not cost a premium after the first 1-2 models that have it, which premium you have no idea about as that ASIC could be a couple of bucks extra = no real price increase to be noted built into your new multi-100$ monitor, while G-Sync is defacto $150 or more, on a handful of displays, and requires getting your hands dirty on some of them as it is not a built in feature.

Yes, G-Sync is available today, for some monitors, which unless you go for the way more expensive ROG 1440p are a serious compromise for most ppl that don't use them exclusively for gaming.
No, I would not give away my 27" 1440p to get an overpriced "gaming" TN, and then pay more for G-Sync. Why? Cause it is hypocritical diluting the guestimations about a limited target group in case of Free-sync, and swallowing the camel that is called G-Sync.

Freesync's cost and availability is based on a (sounding/reading) pretty biased guesstimation, G-Sync costs is based on facts.

So you, and few others, use a double standard, painting reality in an obvious color.

Writing 20 post per hour about it, doesn't make it any better for G-Sync - which is a great idea, yet niche and pricey and rigged to favor nVidia more than consumers.
Just proves you are picking camps in ways that narrow your objectivity.

This entire post is completely wrong.

1) The new hardware required does not exist yet. It has to be developed by someone - Nvidia chose to take on that task. If AMD doesn't do the same, someone else has to. AMD is hoping it will be the display manufacturers. But it won't be guaranteed, you won't be able to just buy a new DP monitor and expect to have it.

2) Because the display manufacturers have to develop it, they WILL charge you for it. You can blame Nvidia all you want, but it will be Asus charging you for FreeSync, if they ever bother to develop it in the first place. Again, a big, big if. What reason would Asus have to not try to recoup their development costs by charging you for new technology that THEY spent money developing?

3) FreeSync's cost and availability is based on a lie, or at the very most generous a gross misstatement. AMD knows full well that it requires new hardware, and told people that, but also told people it wouldn't require new hardware. I am confident calling it a lie, but even if you're not willing to go that far it's at the very least highly deceptive. FreeSync is not free, and it's not freely available. Open does not mean "automatically in everything, at no cost." There is a big step between the ability to have something on other platforms and actually having the thing developed and implemented.

4) The only double standard is the one you're creating. You're expecting Nvidia to not charge for hardware and technology that it developed, and if they don't they're a big mean evil green evil company that's evil. Why shouldn't they? They're doing the work. They're making the effort. They're designing the hardware. They're finding the suppliers. Why shouldn't we pay them for it? Your claim is about as reasonable as saying that we should have gotten Hawaii or Maxwell as open source for no added cost. While G-Sync isn't quite on the same scale of investment as a new GPU, it's still significant and we should still expect to pay for them.

And no, before you ask, I'm not an Nvidia fanboy. I currently have an AMD GPU. I've gone back and forth numerous times. I hold no brand loyalty. But I am holding FreeSync's introduction against AMD, because they've been incredibly deceptive about the whole thing. And they seemed to have succeeded in fooling people: quite simply, you are proof. You and the dozens of other people who have been totally duped, latching on to the "free and open" buzzword and completely missing the wool AMD pulled over your eyes. Variable refresh is the future, and I don't care how we get it. But I don't think it's appropriate for AMD to behave as it has done, basically just trying to sabotage interest in G-Sync because they have nothing to actually offer themselves.

Do the research. Look at the follow-up investigations done by tech reporters. Read the comments by display manufacturers about the level of effort involved. Do your homework before you blame Nvidia for doing absolutely nothing wrong.
Mand12 is offline  
post #78 of 422 (permalink) Old 04-05-2014, 02:30 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: California
Posts: 10,813
Rep: 609 (Unique: 499)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mand12 View Post

The word was never that FreeSync was impossible, but rather that it was impossible with current hardware. Nothing about that has changed. And it was AMD who said it would require new hardware, so why shouldn't we believe them?

Regardless, this is a good thing. Variable refresh is the future, and I for one don't care how we get it. I do get bothered when companies spread deliberate misinformation that does not stand up to scrutiny solely as a means to rain on the other guy's parade, as AMD did with their original FreeSync demo.

And, just so everyone is clear, updating the DP spec does not change existing hardware. You can't magically get a panel that has zero variable refresh capability to turn into one that does just by adjusting what signals you send over the DP cable. This has all been rather thoroughly investigated already, so let's please not rehash the same debunked arguments once more.

Changes to the DP spec to support variable refresh is a good thing. VESA adopting it is a good thing. But don't for a second think that this step, as important as it is, has any impact whatsoever on hardware. It will require hardware development on the part of display manufacturers, period.

Some panels could conceivably be made FreeSync compatible with a firmware update

Audio setup: Xonar Essence ST into Niles SI-275 amplifier driving CSW Tower II speakers paired with M&K MX-70 subwoofer. Headphones: DT880 Pro 250ohm
Mygaffer is offline  
post #79 of 422 (permalink) Old 04-05-2014, 02:41 PM - Thread Starter
New to Overclock.net
 
Tobiman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New York
Posts: 1,730
Rep: 64 (Unique: 49)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mand12 View Post

AMD is doing nothing. Seriously. FreeSync does not exist, AMD is not actually developing it. AMD said, with their own statement, that they made the demo to encourage display manufacturers to invest in the technology.

There is nothing whatsoever comparable between Nvidia actually getting hardware out the door and into the hands of consumers and AMD sitting back and hoping someone else does the work.

And no, you shouldn't take my word for it, you should take AMD's word for it. Go read their statements on the subject.
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.
Tobiman is offline  
post #80 of 422 (permalink) Old 04-05-2014, 03:08 PM
Linux Lobbyist
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,635
Rep: 485 (Unique: 408)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mand12 View Post

AMD is doing nothing. Seriously. FreeSync does not exist, AMD is not actually developing it. AMD said, with their own statement, that they made the demo to encourage display manufacturers to invest in the technology.

There is nothing whatsoever comparable between Nvidia actually getting hardware out the door and into the hands of consumers and AMD sitting back and hoping someone else does the work.

And no, you shouldn't take my word for it, you should take AMD's word for it. Go read their statements on the subject.

Yes but seriously this is how it SHOULD be done. If Nvidia could have patented this technology, I'm sure they would have.

Checkout my DOSBox LIVEusb - https://sites.google.com/site/dosboxdistro/
Retrogaming made portable.

PassMark System Score: Passmark Rating 5,710, CPU Mark 19,985CPU-Z Validation: LINK AIDA64: LINKCinebench15: LINK Geekbench3 scores: LINK Geekbench4.1 scores: LINKUserBenchmarks: CPU: 105.5%, GPU: 111.7% MEM: 127.9%
BinaryDemon is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off