Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
FreeSyncs dead in the water, as AMD are no longer in the gaming card market.
-
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.
GPU prices go boom
- Thread starter RavenXXX2
- Start date
FreeSyncs dead in the water, as AMD are no longer in the gaming card market.
Wow they've shot up
I bought a freesync monitor hope it doesn't play up on a 1080
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 4,135
- Location
- Birmingham
Sold my 980ti kingpin for 375.... Whats my 1080ti one worth these days lol
Permabanned
- Joined
- 2 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 270
wanted to upgrade......but is way to expensive these days.....I build my computer a few years ago..decent one that time and cost me around 1000.To buy something decent now will be around 2000 with a decent monitor.
Absolutely. They both are. Although it would seem that one is less expensive.It does make me wonder why G-Sync is a ball and chain, but Freesync isn't, seeing as they both only work with one companies GPU.
But I've avoided both as I don't want to be locked in to either company. That's despite me being a paid shill for nV (according to some on here...)
It does make me wonder why G-Sync is a ball and chain, but Freesync isn't, seeing as they both only work with one companies GPU.
I suspect price is the reason. Freesync is cheaper - I picked up my Samsung 144Hz freesync screen for the same price as the cheapest 144Hz screen on here. And if you look at 144Hz screens, the difference between the cheapest and the cheapest freesync is £20. Go up in price a little to the cheapest non-TN panel and it's a VA MSI with freesync. Basically, if you're looking for a new screen without a *sync tech in it, freesync screens might come into the picture because price wise they're in the same ball park. G-Sync screens are more expensive, cheapest on here is £400 TN 180Hz, well you can get a TN 240Hz with no sync for £300. It's 1" bigger, but basically if you're looking for a high refresh rate monitor, why would you consider the GSync one? So the only reason to buy the Gsync one is if you want GSync, so it becomes a ball and chain because presumably you want to keep Gsync. Freesync will become a ball and chain to people who want to keep freesync, but to those that don't care about *sync tech and bought the screen because it was a good screen in a similar price category it won't. Of course this assumes all screens at the same spec are the same and have no problems etc and that people don't care what they're screen physically looks like, go faster strips et all
^Take with a pinch of salt.
PS My screen would probably work better without Freesync tbh.....
It does make me wonder why G-Sync is a ball and chain, but Freesync isn't, seeing as they both only work with one companies GPU.
Rather ironically freesync has to date often been the more limiting (if cheaper) platform.
AMD users have consitently been left out of having top tier graphics cards card available to compete with nvidia over that past few years leaving some owners of the bigger freesync monitors either struggling on with an older insufficient AMD card or just giving up and going for an nvidia card and not using their monitors full features
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,192
Also when AMD fail to get Freesync working right on a game (as per The Division) they just give up on it (resource issue I imagine, ie They have none).
Until Nvidia finally support Freesync they will both be balls and chains, one limiting the level of GPU performance options available and the other limiting monitor choiceIt does make me wonder why G-Sync is a ball and chain, but Freesync isn't, seeing as they both only work with one companies GPU.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
It'll be fine on it, just won't be able to use the FreeSync (obviously).
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 5,474
- Location
- No Mans Land
Until Nvidia finally support Freesync they will both be balls and chains, one limiting the level of GPU performance options available and the other limiting monitor choice
If Nvidia do support freesync as well AMD will be dead and buried.
Game over.
Not bothered now the silence of this thing and the speed of it,I could get done for speeding it's so fast
It does make me wonder why G-Sync is a ball and chain, but Freesync isn't, seeing as they both only work with one companies GPU.
First XboneX, upcoming Intel GPUs and AMD.
Second Vesa Adaptive Sync on hardware level is supported by Nvidia on all GTX10xx cards. The drivers ofc don't have the functionality to make it work on discrete graphic cards ONLY.
Why I made ONLY bold. Because nvidia is using Vesa Adaptive sync (aka Freesync), on all their mobile drivers for the "Gsync" laptop monitors to work, which none of them has Gsync module. So Nvidia actually in basic terms supports "Freesync" but only on laptops......
When you have no competition and then weak competition, you are going to charge as much as you can get away with. Then again any business will always charge as much as they can get away with. Those Vega post retailer rebates where "good value" where they not
i did ok i got a Rx 64 from here for 400 quid, seems like the bargain of the century now haha
eDP VRR (as often used on laptops) actually predates both VESA adaptive sync as per used by FreeSync and G-Sync.