• 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.

AMD: DisplayPort 1.3 and HDMI 2.0 in 2016 Radeon GPUs, First FreeSync Over HDMI Monitors

humbug said:
No idea but the tech has potential in more than just Desktop gaming, a lot more if its going to be over HDMI, few manufacturing outside of Desktop gaming are going to pay $150 for a lump of hardware that they have to install when they can get the same thing for free, especially if it ties them to one vendor.
how long before Apple take up the tech with AMD's solution? the new Nintendo?

Nvidia will milk the module while the going is good and then drop it with a PR campaign on how brilliant their solution is and no longer a need for the module, its Inevitable.

Oh... and APU's in smart Telly's ;)
Click to expand...

Probably.

Stanners said:
Not sure to be honest, I just took the article for what it states that Both AMD and Nvidia had Fs/Gs over hdmi. This was back in June so I guess the announcements we are hearing now are progressions from this(or maybe not ;) )
Click to expand...

Not heard any more on HDMI G-Sync and read articles that it was just an extra non vrr input as the single port was off putting, can testify to it being a right pita too when trying to fault find as you need another DP capable gpu lying about to test.:(

Phixsator said:
We already have Freesync "TVs" from the korean market.
Click to expand...

Never knew they were out, just thought it was the 40"+ panel monitors that was all but a TV(remote inc) minus the tuner-which coincidentally got FreeSync enabled via a bios flash.
 
tommybhoy said:
In relation to what I quoted you with, I'm not trying to prove you wrong, you dug that hole yourself, zero cost increase state you are wrong-fact.
Click to expand...

Because I never said that. I said something in response to what people were claiming, their original claim and my response form a context, out of which you are taking something and making something else, which is not what I said.

People were saying that freesync would be on all monitors AND that it would be free - I responded by saying that it would most likely primarily be on "premium" and "gamer" monitors (which themselves already carry a price premium over non-gamer ones). e.g. LG released the UM67 as a newer product, they didn't update the UM65 for free.

I don't know which part of this you are struggling with.

I also said that freesync would face challenges going forward, I never said it would definitely fail, I said that it needed at least Intel and more likley Nvidia to support it for it to succeed. People also said that gsync would be gone within no time, and I responded that gsync would carry on for as long as nvidia make money from it, which again, is what is happening now, with them still announcing new models.

You seem to be assuming a lot of things about what I said or meant, and they aren't the case.

*I* know that the "free" as far as AMD were concerned was that it was licence-free, and that is fine. Where *I* pulled people up was where they were saying freesync would be a free upgrade for existing monitors (because of a rumour of a korean one, which also never materialised on the manf's website)

I'm not anti-freesync at all, I'm only trying to interject some balance and then getting jumped on by you and a few other posters for not bowing at the altar of freesync.
 
Last edited:
andybird123 said:
Because I never said that. I said something in response to what people were claiming, their original claim and my response form a context, out of which you are taking something and making something else, which is not what I said.

People were saying that freesync would be on all monitors AND that it would be free - I responded by saying that it would most likely primarily be on "premium" and "gamer" monitors (which themselves already carry a price premium over non-gamer ones). e.g. LG released the UM67 as a newer product, they didn't update the UM65 for free.

I don't know which part of this you are struggling with.

I also said that freesync would face challenges going forward, I never said it would definitely fail, I said that it needed at least Intel and more likley Nvidia to support it for it to succeed. People also said that gsync would be gone within no time, and I responded that gsync would carry on for as long as nvidia make money from it, which again, is what is happening now, with them still announcing new models.

You seem to be assuming a lot of things about what I said or meant, and they aren't the case.

*I* know that the "free" as far as AMD were concerned was that it was licence-free, and that is fine. Where *I* pulled people up was where they were saying freesync would be a free upgrade for existing monitors (because of a rumour of a korean one, which also never materialised on the manf's website)

I'm not anti-freesync at all, I'm only trying to interject some balance and then getting jumped on by you and a few other posters for not bowing at the altar of freesync.
Click to expand...

seems plausible to me.

My freesync 144hz 1440p as far is what I wanted for a decade now.
Having it with freesync is ice on cake.
HDR 144hz 3440x1440 seems like a good thing to own also.
Freesync obviously. :)
 
andybird123 said:
Because I never said that.
Click to expand...

Who wrote this then?

andybird123 said:
ok, so... a 21.5" LG Monitor, £60-70... AOC 21.5" Freesync monitor, £99.95

and so on

no they have not been "absorbed", like for like they are either more expensive, or they are a "premium" or "gamer" monitor
Click to expand...

Still waiting on your explanation on how LG didn't absorb the cost despite 0p increase in price.

I provide apple to apple, you provided apple to bananas.

Multiple users have commented on your ignorance on the subject so I'll leave it with the question it appears you don't want to answer, again how much FS premium did LG add on top on their ultra wide monitor?
 
Its definitely not a TV there is no tuner in it and no coaxial input.
 
Last edited:
tommybhoy said:
Who wrote this then?



Still waiting on your explanation on how LG didn't absorb the cost despite 0p increase in price.

I provide apple to apple, you provided apple to bananas.

Multiple users have commented on your ignorance on the subject so I'll leave it with the question it appears you don't want to answer, again how much FS premium did LG add on top on their ultra wide monitor?
Click to expand...

BECAUSE ITS A PREMIUM MONITOR

premium products keep being premium by adding new features each year

the UM65, if it stayed on sale for 3 years would drop in price, by renaming it the UM67 and adding freesync it maintains its price point

I really don't know how many ways I can explain what "premium" means, it is right there in what you quoted of me, you are choosing to ignore half the sentence I actually wrote, you are just creating a strawman argument

apparently you don't have to be a complete moron to post on this forum, but it certainly helps in any AMD thread

andybird123 said:
no they have not been "absorbed", like for like they are either more expensive, or they are a "premium" or "gamer" monitor, which is exactly what I said when people started saying the freesync would be on "every" monitor or that it would be "free"
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
its not like I have anything better to do looking after the kids when they are watching cbeebies :D

I may as well prod the kids on here as well, the difference is my 5 year old actually knows what "OR" means
 
Last edited:
D.P. said:
But he GSync premium has nothing to do with the cost of Gsync. Some people really can't understand cost vs value. The market is dictating the value of gsync. The GSync hardware cost vs Freesync scaler is basically irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I would have thought that was obvious,

If you read the quote in my post you'll see that the first part of my post was about what we was told would be added to a monitor that includes free-sync. That was nothing to do with G-sync.
The comment after which was about G-sync was there to highlight how much price gouging that is being done because of the market trend yes.

You just have to look at the Asus ROG equivalents to see this. The only real difference outside of the sync's is 21hz just like the only real difference between the 21:9 predator panels is 25hz
On the 16:9's there 27" IPS Freesync panel is 455 while the 27" IPS G-sync panel is 749.

andybird123 said:
Quick tell AOC, as their freesync monitors are 1/4 more
Click to expand...

That's on AOC. As I just said above that's where it matters ie: Free v G
 
Last edited:
andybird123 said:
BECAUSE ITS A PREMIUM MONITOR

premium products keep being premium by adding new features each year

the UM65, if it stayed on sale for 3 years would drop in price, by renaming it the UM67 and adding freesync it maintains its price point
Click to expand...

While the replaced model which isn't remotely close to 3 years old maintains it's pp with a lesser spec...

bdiXkLw.png


Best get back to the chuckle brothers on TV andy.:D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom