• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

FreeSync monitors hit mass production, coming in Jan-Feb

CNET; "34UC87M is a 34-inch monitor with a 3440x 1440"

That isnt the model with freesync
The 34UM65 is 2560x1080 and this updated version is aswell, the Amd release is accurate

What is confusing people is that LG press release doesnt say what the resolution is on the UM67 and then also talks about two other models that are 1440
 
Arcane said:
ULMB is superb, am I not right in thinking it's an nvidia tech though? I'd be interested in an IPS panel with Swift specs, though it would have to be spectacular for me to give the Swift up.
Click to expand...

acer are making such a screen 1440p 144hz ips
 
Serious question. Do you think that these monitor manufacturers, have actually seen AMD's freesync in action and I mean a proper demo of it and not just the spining windmill that we have been shown, or are they just produceing Adapdtive Sync compliant monitors on the say so of AMD, that freesync will do the same job as aswell as GSync?
 
100% sure they have, why would anyone go through all this marketing on something they never seen in action would be mind blowing..

Plus amd had Freesync working on games at a closed event the one with huddy was on stage and dropped the 100$ less price tag.
 
I have read that as well andy, something about the response time not being quick enough to transition a pixel before a refresh @ 144hz?

BTW does anyone know if Asus actually spend more on R&D to justify higher prices for being out first, they have become very advanced with products like custom CPU sockets and design wins in HPC so been wondering.
 
No comment to the 30hz to 144hz refresh rate range though, I could have sworn I read somewhere amd sync would go lower than 30hz.:p
 
Yeah, just a theory at this point as it is actually ahva, which is very similar to ips in form and function but will be interesting to see if AU have managed black magic, or they just overdrive the hell out of it

Ian Evey said:
No comment to the 30hz to 144hz refresh rate range though, I could have sworn I read somewhere amd sync would go lower than 30hz.:p
Click to expand...

:D :D
 
Potential ranges include 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz.

Still early days, we only just getting the first line up..

And tbh I think less than 30hz would benefit 4k users the most..
 
Ian Evey said:
No comment to the 30hz to 144hz refresh rate range though, I could have sworn I read somewhere amd sync would go lower than 30hz.:p
Click to expand...
To be fair though, outside of watching films which would give minimal to no benefit the fact that tearing can/will occur at sub 30 FPS would be the least of your problems, these sync solutions to not magically make everything smooth at low FPS they just allow varying frame-rates (that are not spikey) to appear smoother because the monitor is refreshing when it needs to and not at per-determined intervals.
 
I was thinking of upgrading my GPU (290) but I've decided getting a Free-Sync monitor is by far the better option. I'm the sort of person who locks to 30 if I can't hit 60 (tearing and judder are an absolute no-go for me ) so being able to play at 45fps would be a dream come true.
 
shankly1985 said:
Potential ranges include 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz.

Still early days, we only just getting the first line up..

And tbh I think less than 30hz would benefit 4k users the most..
Click to expand...

Yes, key word being "potential".
We did point out that it did not mean products were definitely going to have that support and here we are with no products supporting any of those ranges
 
andybird123 said:
Yes, key word being "potential".
We did point out that it did not mean products were definitely going to have that support and here we are with no products supporting any of those ranges
Click to expand...

I never once said it would be 100% fact that displays would release with these ranges from the get go.. All I was doing is talking about the information we had from the white paper..

nothing else!
 
You said that freesync was better than gsync because it supports a wider range of refresh rates

I pointed out to you then that it was entirely dependant on the panel and you dismissed that because "amd say so"
 
I said it's better? Since when how can I without even trying both?

If you go back you will see on paper Freesync could be the better of the two.

Based on what was put out there..

Get your facts straight.

And Freesync could still be better, for all we know. It's not even been tested yet.
I have not once said it as if I have used both and called Freesync the better.
How can I?

Typical ocuk forums twisting the crap out of people's posts.
 
Last edited:
I never understood what the point would be of 9hz support. If your game is running at 9fps that's way below the limit required to perceive a series of frames as motion.
 
Instead creating a new thread..

If you have two monitors and two GPUs can you run each display of a single GPU or does both displays need to be connected to the top card?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom