AMD's Future of Gaming: FreeSync, DirectX 12, LiquidVR, VR And More

[Gregster]

[/IMG]

Honestly, that was me when I looked into it I naturally assumed that 25 fps were sent and 25 duplicate frames were sent (in between the regular frames) and because of this, that would equate to 50 fps.

Now it turns out that 25 fps are sent with a further 25 fps and that equals 25 fps.... Ahhhh man, I am back there again

Anyways, I understand that each frame is now sent with the buffered frame at the same time but spaced out into equal time so that the game has fluidity and no tearing or stutter.

I would love someone from nVidia to say "actually Gregster, you are correct and we send 25 fps inbetween the other 25 fps and that does in fact make 50 fps and that is our secret sauce" Sadly, I feel that isn't going to happen though

 

[bru]

Man think
Each frame is over lapped a mirror of each other. Take one single frame and then take another single frame. Place frame one over the top frame two, you now have two frames but only displaying one when sent to the display. 25+25 mirrored fit into a 50hz refresh removing screen tear.

Yiu only ever see 25 frames out of the other hidden 25fps.

Man I suck at explaining things.

Ok so if your correct and that scenario is only 25 fps because half of the frames are the same, then this scenario is 1 frame per minute because they are all the same.

ok so in that case if you load up your favourite game, say battlefield 4, move to a place where nothing is happening on screen. Your onscreen frame counter will tell you your doing 75fps for example, you do not move anything for a whole minute. calculating things the way you suggest your getting one frame a minute, rather than 75 frames a second.

The content of each frame or whether it is sent fresh from the GPU or fetched from a memory buffer is irrelevant.

Of course saying all that 25 new frames and 25 duplicated frames even if running at 50Hz (50fps) is still only 25 new frames so the fluidity of the scene will be compromised regardless of how smooth it feels.

I really need to get hold of one of these Gsync monitors, but I cannot justify the cost when my 1200p DGM is still alive and kicking.

 

[Final8y]

Honestly, that was me when I looked into it I naturally assumed that 25 fps were sent and 25 duplicate frames were sent (in between the regular frames) and because of this, that would equate to 50 fps.

Now it turns out that 25 fps are sent with a further 25 fps and that equals 25 fps.... Ahhhh man, I am back there again

Anyways, I understand that each frame is now sent with the buffered frame at the same time but spaced out into equal time so that the game has fluidity and no tearing or stutter.

I would love someone from nVidia to say "actually Gregster, you are correct and we send 25 fps inbetween the other 25 fps and that does in fact make 50 fps and that is our secret sauce" Sadly, I feel that isn't going to happen though

The same frame is sent twice. so my monitor at 60hz but only getting 30fps is getting 2 duplicate frames for every frame, a duplicate frame does not count as a FPS so 30fps x2 does not count as 60FPS as only fresh frames count as a FPS.


bru's last post pretty much says the same.

25fps is still 25fps, yes not having the tearing will be an improvement but the fundamentals of 25fps does not change, its not going to be fluid in any game that is fast paced or has fast moment.

 

[bru]

The same frame is sent twice. so my monitor at 60hz but only getting 30fps is getting 2 duplicate frames for every frame, a duplicate frame does not count as a FPS so 30fps x2 does not count as 60FPS as only fresh frames count as a FPS.

ok so in that case if you load up your favourite game, say battlefield 4, move to a place where nothing is happening on screen. Your onscreen frame counter will tell you your doing 75fps for example, you do not move anything for a whole minute. calculating things the way you suggest your getting one frame a minute, rather than 75 frames a second.

So you believe this scenario it would be 1 frame a minute then, seeing as they are all duplicate frames ?

 

[shankly1985]

Ok so if your correct and that scenario is only 25 fps because half of the frames are the same, then this scenario is 1 frame per minute because they are all the same.






The content of each frame or whether it is sent fresh from the GPU or fetched from a memory buffer is irrelevant.

Of course saying all that 25 new frames and 25 duplicated frames even if running at 50Hz (50fps) is still only 25 new frames so the fluidity of the scene will be compromised regardless of how smooth it feels.

I really need to get hold of one of these Gsync monitors, but I cannot justify the cost when my 1200p DGM is still alive and kicking.

Were are you getting one frame per minute from?

 

[Gregster]

If someone puts a pound in my hand and directly on top of that, they put another pound in my hand and I can only see one pound when I look in my hand, does that mean I have one pound or?

 

[Final8y]

So you believe this scenario it would be 1 frame a minute then, seeing as they are all duplicate frames ?

I dont know why you even came to that i was implying that.

No as The GPU is still processing a fresh frame 75 times a second and sending it and not sending the same frame already processed 75 times from the buffer. the player not moving does not change the fundamentals that its a fresh frame and not a duplicate, the GPU does not care if the new fresh frame looks exactly like the old one because the player was not moving.


If a game is running at 60fps and you pause it you still get 60fps because the GPU will still process the paused game frames regardless if the image is not moving.

 

[shankly1985]

If someone puts a pound in my hand and directly on top of that, they put another pound in my hand and I can only see one pound when I look in my hand, does that mean I have one pound or?

This is different man!

If it worked how you said above you would end up with a blur image. You would end up something like this..

http://i.imgur.com/nwcYC.jpg

 

[Gregster]

Just been talking to a friend and he said "The reason the game and GPU can't see it is because it's the G-Sync module that handles that extra frame or frames after they have rendered them and delivers it to the display". Which makes sense to me. The G-Sync module has 768MB of memory that does something that is undisclosed. It could well be sending a duplicate frame, paced out and Fraps will not pick it up, as it is between the module and the screen, so FRAPS wouldn't see it.

 

[shankly1985]

Just been talking to a friend and he said "The reason the game and GPU can't see it is because it's the G-Sync module that handles that extra frame or frames after they have rendered them and delivers it to the display". Which makes sense to me. The G-Sync module has 768MB of memory that does something that is undisclosed. It could well be sending a duplicate frame, paced out and Fraps will not pick it up, as it is between the module and the screen, so FRAPS wouldn't see it.

If that's the case then when I enable double buffer that uses the GPU vram to store the frames so if its true what you saying. then 60fps will be 120fps..

Come on we all know this isnt true.

Your friend like others cant seem to wrap there head around this..
Or even better why not enable triple buffer at 60fps and get 180fps

 

[Gregster]

I understand what you are saying Shanks and it does make sense but I am really good at picking up tearing/stutter and gaming on a PS3 at 30 fps is a killer for me but seeing how G-Sync coped in B:AO at 5K was just "WOW!!!". It was so smooth, it just looked impossible for the frames I was getting or told I was getting (if that makes sense).

That is roughly 25 fps with slight ups and downs.... Just so smooth.

 

[shankly1985]

I understand what you are saying Shanks and it does make sense but I am really good at picking up tearing/stutter and gaming on a PS3 at 30 fps is a killer for me but seeing how G-Sync coped in B:AO at 5K was just "WOW!!!". It was so smooth, it just looked impossible for the frames I was getting or told I was getting (if that makes sense).

That is roughly 25 fps with slight ups and downs.... Just so smooth.

Yeah and I understand what you saying.. but for a frame to be different the game would need to render a new frame and that would be shown. in the OSD
You might find Gsync more enjoyable because the screen tear is gone. But you still truly only seeing whats shown.
Like Ryan and PCM2 pointed out.

The reason on PS3 or 30fps on console will feel strange is because they use vsync. They also add in motion blur effects.

Here mine running Metro LL at like 15-17fps

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anlebnLVwXM

 

[Phixsator]

I think its very important to note that there is a difference "look" and "feel" and its important to distingues between them. 30hz content is not that bad to look at but the second you add interactivity to the mix it becomes a whole other ball game and things, for most people, start to become unpleasant due to the rather slow update.

My personal experience with gsync and 30 fps gaming has not been pleasant but i personally think that if i would to take a step back and just look at gsync at 30fps it would look better, due to frame doubling, than 30fps/60hz static would, tearing aside. It the same effect you would get from the newer TVs that shows 30hz content in 120hz by refreshing the last frame 4 times before it gives you a new one. But put your hand on the mouse and you are back in s*ckvile and its unbearable.

My main problem with g-sync is how its been hyped, like it could cure cancer, and make 30 fps gaming seem like 60fps and that is simply not true. You would have to be ignorant if anyone were to say that they cannot feel a difference between 30fps gsync and 60fps non-sync, again without talking about tearing, and if im stepping on some peoples feet here then im sorry if i have offended you, didnt mean to, but i stand by my comment.

I think the concept of g-sync is cool and certainly usefull in certain scenarios like 45-60 fps gaming as it does make a difference there and it does help giving the user an overall much better experience but there are limits to it. A pig is still a pig even if you put lipstick on it.

EDIT: TO clarify.. gsync is the lipstick

 

[Gregster]

Yeah and I understand what you saying.. but for a frame to be different the game would need to render a new frame and that would be shown. in the OSD
You might find Gsync more enjoyable because the screen tear is gone. But you still truly only seeing whats shown.
Like Ryan and PCM2 pointed out.

The reason on PS3 or 30fps on console will feel strange is because they use vsync. They also add in motion blur effects.

Here mine running Metro LL at like 15-17fps

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anlebnLVwXM

Yer, it reallly stands out with that video how low frames are terrible. Very stuttery and no chance of ever being able to pay like that. Horrendous.

 

[shankly1985]

Yer, it reallly stands out with that video how low frames are terrible. Very stuttery and no chance of ever being able to pay like that. Horrendous.

I had no problem? the only thing I can say is they is massive amount of motion blur because the low frame rate..

Has you could see I was easy keeping on target and tracking them..

 

[Gerard]

I understand what you are saying Shanks and it does make sense but I am really good at picking up tearing/stutter and gaming on a PS3 at 30 fps is a killer for me but seeing how G-Sync coped in B:AO at 5K was just "WOW!!!". It was so smooth, it just looked impossible for the frames I was getting or told I was getting (if that makes sense).

That is roughly 25 fps with slight ups and downs.... Just so smooth.

You bought a 5k monitor? Or are you using dsr? Technically not 5k then.

 

[Phixsator]

You bought a 5k monitor? Or are you using dsr? Technically not 5k then.

There are no 5k monitors with gsync support so it must be DSR.

 

[humbug]

That is what Gregster was getting confused with and you also.

Drawing the same frame isn't the same has 30 vs 60fps

60fps being each frame is new, doubled 30fps each frame as a copy.

It's goal is to remove screen tearing, same has the more known triple Buffering.
The game will still be 25fps meaning you will only ever see one of each them frames shown, even thought it is two over each other.

It also adds latency, the last thing you want if your a serious gamer.