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

nashathedog · 11 Dec 2015 at 18:23

andybird123 said:
yes, but OCUK refer to it as being the "ROG Dominator", where as Asus only refer to it as the Dominator, without the ROG branding

You're really good at missing the point being made aint ya

andybird123 · 11 Dec 2015 at 18:24

tommybhoy said:
While the replaced model which isn't remotely close to 3 years old maintains it's pp with a lesser spec...
Best get back to the chuckle brothers on TV andy.

again, I never said it was 3 years old, I said that "if they kept selling it for 3 years" meaning instead of releasing new revisions

yeah, a few sites still have old stock, well done, not sure what that proves... bit of an own goal if they have to discount a freesync model even more in order to sell

nashathedog said:
You're really good at missing the point being made aint ya

... you said they were both ROG monitors... but they aren't... what am I missing?
I said Asus are always a bit wonky when it comes to pricing (particularly when they slap ROG on something)

elmuzzy66. · 11 Dec 2015 at 18:26

I think they should put the added cost on the spec sheets, next to refresh rate etc

tommybhoy · 11 Dec 2015 at 19:44

andybird123 said:
again, I never said it was 3 years old, I said that "if they kept selling it for 3 years" meaning instead of releasing new revisions

yeah, a few sites still have old stock, well done, not sure what that proves... bit of an own goal if they have to discount a freesync model even more in order to sell

Never said you did-again.

Lols, I'm getting andy's logic now, the premium panel didn't absorb the cost they simply discounted it.

Np, yer kid must love watching his dad in jackanory.

nashathedog · 11 Dec 2015 at 20:00

andybird123 said:
again, I never said it was 3 years old, I said that "if they kept selling it for 3 years" meaning instead of releasing new revisions

yeah, a few sites still have old stock, well done, not sure what that proves... bit of an own goal if they have to discount a freesync model even more in order to sell

... you said they were both ROG monitors... but they aren't... what am I missing?
I said Asus are always a bit wonky when it comes to pricing (particularly when they slap ROG on something)

I'd previously said to you "That ones on AOC" and then I said "And that ones on OCUK" as in there the ones who called it a ROG to which you replied:

andybird123 said:
yes, but OCUK refer to it as being the "ROG Dominator", where as Asus only refer to it as the Dominator, without the ROG branding

Regardless of that there both Asus's premium models for the G and Free sync's, Anyone thinking the inclusion of a ROG branding on one of them as being the cause of such a price hike is wrong.

andybird123 · 11 Dec 2015 at 22:00

nashathedog said:
I think you're missing the point being made..

They're both Asus ROG.

^ you said they were both Asus ROG... but they aren't
Asus DO charge extra premiums JUST for sticking ROG on something, you only have to look at their entire ROG range to see that - where as another manufacturer will add say £20 for adding a feature, Asus will add the same feature, colour it red and stick a ROG badge on and that £20 turns in to £100

yes, Gsync costs more than freesync, never denied that, market forces at work because the market will stand it, but using any comparison of ROG vs. non-ROG as the be all and end all of a discussion is not neccessarily an accurate description of the overall position

I personally am not going to spend £1k on a monitor regardless of what features it has, so even I think the widescreen ones are completely mental on pricing and then again you had Asus' rumoured price was £1200! :eek:

having said that, I have somehow ended up with an Asus monitor, motherboard and graphics card, but only because the pricing was right at the time that I bought it - Asus always seem to start off high knowing they have a fan base, but they quickly discount stuff when they need to shift units

I mean, you are comparing 2 similar freesync / gsync models from Asus and saying the £300 is Gsync's fault, but looking at the same type (2560x1440 gsync/freesync) from Acer and their 2 models are only £130 apart... so is the £300 Gsync's fault? or Asus'?

nashathedog · 11 Dec 2015 at 22:20

andybird123 said:
^ you said they were both Asus ROG... but they aren't

I know there not which is why when you originally told me that I replied you can blame OCUK for that one. IE: I got it wrong because this site called it a ROG as you know. This ain't rocket science.

I personally am not going to spend £1k on a monitor regardless of what features it has, so even I think the widescreen ones are completely mental on pricing and then again you had Asus' rumoured price was £1200!

Of course there overpriced, There new to the market that always gets a mark up but it doesn't excuse the difference between them. I've never seen or heard of this Asus one you are saying was expected to be 1200 though it doesn't surprise me from them if its to be there top of the range version of that model it will get a big price tag. It's not just ROG models they stick a premium on.

andybird123 · 11 Dec 2015 at 23:46

The Asus one popped up on preorder for a couple of days and then was silently removed... And yes it was ROG branded (all their gsync ones are), 3800R I think the model name was

TNA · 12 Dec 2015 at 03:20

Lol at this thread, so much bickering. Freesync is free, G-sync is not. There is a big difference in price no matter whichever way you slice it. Deal with it.

Now let's get back on topic

I wonder if HDR will be a big thing for gaming, I can see why it would be for movies, not so much for gaming. Therefore is it worth even getting it early paying a premium for it on a monitor? It will take up extra bandwidth and I would much rather have 120hz 4K panel than 60hz one that has HDR.

OLED, sounds a lot more interesting tech for monitors than HDR to me.

Makes more sense to get HDR on a nice and big TV where I watch movies. I would like my next TV to be a 55-60" 4K OLED TV with HDR. Will probably grab something like that in 18 month or so time when I upgrade my current 50" TV

nashathedog · 12 Dec 2015 at 09:37

TNA said:
Lol at this thread, so much bickering. Freesync is free, G-sync is not. There is a big difference in price no matter whichever way you slice it. Deal with it.

Now let's get back on topic

I wonder if HDR will be a big thing for gaming, I can see why it would be for movies, not so much for gaming. Therefore is it worth even getting it early paying a premium for it on a monitor? It will take up extra bandwidth and I would much rather have 120hz 4K panel than 60hz one that has HDR.

OLED, sounds a lot more interesting tech for monitors than HDR to me.

Makes more sense to get HDR on a nice and big TV where I watch movies. I would like my next TV to be a 55-60" 4K OLED TV with HDR. Will probably grab something like that in 18 month or so time when I upgrade my current 50" TV

I'm still on a 27" TV, I haven't seen the need to go bigger yet, I will do but it's not an outdated TV. Damn! If you're on 50" and want bigger you must be living in a cathedral.

TNA · 12 Dec 2015 at 11:20

nashathedog said:
I'm still on a 27" TV, I haven't seen the need to go bigger yet, I will do but it's not an outdated TV. Damn! If you're on 50" and want bigger you must be living in a cathedral.

27" TV

You must be living in a shoebox then

I suppose it is all relative, but my monitor is 27" and the distance I use that is 30-40cm away from my eyes usually

Believe me, you get used to having a big screen TV after a while and you want bigger. I know because some years ago I did not even have a TV for about a year. We just used my 17" laptop for media consumption and it was fine.

Orangey · 12 Dec 2015 at 12:36

Wow bro I can't imagine having space for a modern big screen TV.

But then again my house has no walls.

andybird123 · 12 Dec 2015 at 13:15

nashathedog said:
I'm still on a 27" TV, I haven't seen the need to go bigger yet, I will do but it's not an outdated TV. Damn! If you're on 50" and want bigger you must be living in a cathedral.

for 4K @ 60", the optimal viewing position is 1.68m...

the optimal position for watching a 27" 1080p is with your face pressed against the screen according to the AV sites

shankly1985 · 7 Jan 2016 at 13:01

CES 2016: AMD Talks Bringing HDMI Support to FreeSync

Enjoy

All AMD GPUs that support Freesync over DisplayPort today will work with HDMI. Thats very, very big news! So if you in the market for new monitor and want freesync you can choose HDMI or DP or even Both.

tommybhoy · 7 Jan 2016 at 13:22

Great find shankly, big update on FreeSync HDMI.

With double the amount of monitors and vrr inputs than the competition, FreeSync is very strong competition with Nvidias G-Sync.

Drop FreeSync into large panel TV's and you'll pile the pressure on urging me into swapping out G-Sync and going red team again.

shankly1985 · 7 Jan 2016 at 13:26

CES 2016: AMD Talks Polaris GPU and HDR Monitors

HDR is something I willing to sell my BenQ XL2730Z for. am a sucker when it comes to calibrate my displays and I can only go as far I can do it without special hardware.
The fact HDR does all this for you and picture perfect has me sold.

@Tommy yeah this is where I want to see Freesync head into TVs and console. I would love the PS4 supports this, now that even my 290 supports HDMI Freesync I have a strong feeling the consoles will.
Now they would need a TV for 30-60hz range or even monitor.

Gregster · 7 Jan 2016 at 13:29

I believe HDMI 1.4a can only do 120Hz at 1080P, so would assume 1440P and higher would be limited to 60Hz or have I got this wrong?

Poneros · 7 Jan 2016 at 13:48

Freesync TVs = the dream!

tommybhoy · 7 Jan 2016 at 13:51

shankly1985 said:
@Tommy yeah this is where I want to see Freesync head into TVs and console. I would love the PS4 supports this, now that even my 290 supports HDMI Freesync I have a strong feeling the consoles will.
Now they would need a TV for 30-60hz range or even monitor.

Poneros said:
Freesync TVs = the dream!

1080p 30-60Hz would do me fine, no need to wave my nuts in the air for high Hz/4K etc when it comes to TV as it's secondary panel use for me, not everyone wants the highest spec however not blind that some do, VRR techs maturing nicely-especially AMD's FreeSync.

layte · 7 Jan 2016 at 13:51

Gregster said:
I believe HDMI 1.4a can only do 120Hz at 1080P

Not quite. 1.4b can do a frame packed 1080p60 but cannot send 120 discreet frames. My TV supports 1080p120 but I can only get it to display that from my HDMI 2.0 enabled NV card, trying to output 1080p120 from my NUC which supports a frame packed 1080p60 gives nothing.