Soldato
Good watch. Interesting statement amd are saying about the differences between them.
-
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: FAQ for Project FreeSync is up
- Thread starter Warsam71
- Start date
Soldato
Aye I agree too. It'll be interesting to see if/what the differences are when AMD finally gives us more indepth info.
had to lol, have you ever seen an amd feeesync monitor, then girl with the long hair is like, 'have you ever seen a gync monitor.... the guys like weve had one since november...but that doesnt count, for some reason thats disregarded and only the one they have at the moment counts.
Caporegime
Ryan seems to have a similar view I have on it at the moment, doesn't seem to be anything "free" about it and AMD's version will be proprietary. I think what nvidia will do is get rid of the gsync module and make a proprietary version from the standard as well as there really isn't going to be a need for the module anymore.
This all depends on how well it works against gsync though. Seems like it could be better.
This all depends on how well it works against gsync though. Seems like it could be better.
Where did you see a controller module been needed?
Soldato
Either I missed this bit in the FAQ when writing my previous post, or it has been updated since writing that post with this statement:
I'm not sure how to interpret this. On the one hand, you could interpret this as saying that the graphics card just fires off new frames when the monitor is ready for them, since it knows how to do so. Presumably the monitor would just hold the frame for as long as it needs to with this system.
On the other hand you could say, especially with that last sentence, that the monitor is being told when it receives a frame that it needs to hold it for a time predicted by the graphics card (which the graphics card knows is an acceptable time since it has determined the monitor's minimum and maximum refresh rates), rather than the monitor constantly asking "do I need to keep holding this frame" and the graphics card replying with its answer.
Again, If I had to guess the method without frame time prediction seems more likely, but there might be some complex reason for requiring frame time prediction. Just a simple yes or no answer to "does freesync utilise a method for predicting how long a frame will take to render, or how long it will need to stay on the monitor" would be great
Freesync FAQ said:
I'm not sure how to interpret this. On the one hand, you could interpret this as saying that the graphics card just fires off new frames when the monitor is ready for them, since it knows how to do so. Presumably the monitor would just hold the frame for as long as it needs to with this system.
On the other hand you could say, especially with that last sentence, that the monitor is being told when it receives a frame that it needs to hold it for a time predicted by the graphics card (which the graphics card knows is an acceptable time since it has determined the monitor's minimum and maximum refresh rates), rather than the monitor constantly asking "do I need to keep holding this frame" and the graphics card replying with its answer.
Again, If I had to guess the method without frame time prediction seems more likely, but there might be some complex reason for requiring frame time prediction. Just a simple yes or no answer to "does freesync utilise a method for predicting how long a frame will take to render, or how long it will need to stay on the monitor" would be great
Caporegime
I think they discussed that in the above video Reaper, I think what they interpreted no communication overhead or latency penalties to mean there won't be any prediction or buffer whereas with GSYNC they think the 768mb memory on the module is used for buffering.
Caporegime
I was expecting a new controller Asic would need fitting but that doesn't appear to be necessary.
Associate
why Greg? its part of the vesa spec for 1.2a; its optional for now; but said to be part of the full spec for 1.3......
second; monitor manufactures are already doing this for laptop monitors so I don't see where they would need a full new asic controller
Associate
Makes it very tempting to get a r9 290
Caporegime
I think its quite simple, the GPU communicates directly with the screens input module decoder, in the same way a standard screen does.
The difference is a standard screen displays a constant 60hz / 120hz / 144hz depending on what the screen is capable of, so if your GPU is pumping 30 FPS into the standard screen it will display 60hz, so a lot of what your seeing has actually been refreshed twice.
The FreeSync screen with the VESA standard Display Port will have a veritable V-Blanck Module, the way i think this works is the screen is effectively off until it gets a frame from the GPU, it will display that frame for a set time calculated based on the Screens 'Maximum Refresh Rate', once that time has elapsed it goes back into a 'blank' state until it gets the next frame from the GPU.
So if your GPU is rendering 30 FPS then your screens refresh rate is also 30hz, if its 72 FPS then the screen is refreshing at 72hz, and so on.....
There is no buffering in-between to sync frames, it doesn't need to do that so there is no need for a G-Sync stile buffer module, that module adds latency as its always at-least one frame behind, which at 60 FPS is 16ms of latency, at 30 FPS its 32ms.
The difference is a standard screen displays a constant 60hz / 120hz / 144hz depending on what the screen is capable of, so if your GPU is pumping 30 FPS into the standard screen it will display 60hz, so a lot of what your seeing has actually been refreshed twice.
The FreeSync screen with the VESA standard Display Port will have a veritable V-Blanck Module, the way i think this works is the screen is effectively off until it gets a frame from the GPU, it will display that frame for a set time calculated based on the Screens 'Maximum Refresh Rate', once that time has elapsed it goes back into a 'blank' state until it gets the next frame from the GPU.
So if your GPU is rendering 30 FPS then your screens refresh rate is also 30hz, if its 72 FPS then the screen is refreshing at 72hz, and so on.....
There is no buffering in-between to sync frames, it doesn't need to do that so there is no need for a G-Sync stile buffer module, that module adds latency as its always at-least one frame behind, which at 60 FPS is 16ms of latency, at 30 FPS its 32ms.
Last edited:
Caporegime
why Greg? its part of the vesa spec for 1.2a; its optional for now; but said to be part of the full spec for 1.3......
second; monitor manufactures are already doing this for laptop monitors so I don't see where they would need a full new asic controller
I was going from early memory (at my age it isn't that great) and talk was a new Asic Controller would need fitting (which some forums are still claiming) and would add cost to the monitor. Not that it would bother me but what frustrates me with AMD, is the lack of any solid info. I am sure Freesync is coming but not a single monitor manufacturer mentioned from AMD or when the new standard will be implemented. I want to see both AMD and nVidia pushing forward with this but it just seems a lot of talk and no backup from AMD at present, whilst nVidia are all talk and have the minerals to back it up.
Caporegime
Because it wasn't a retail monitor obviously, the gsync monitors that come from the factory with the module are only now starting to be available to customers....
His question was.... Have you ever seen a freesync monitor and a stupid comment of have you seen a gsync monitor, not wither they were retail or not.
Its obviously what they were referring to, all the drama lately has been about freesync still being months off and its only recently gync monitors have started showing up. Unless you wanted to upgrade a specific monitor yourself or buy one that had already been upgraded then gsync is only very recently available. Obviously its a waiting game for freesync as well but there was also one with gsync.
It wasn't really, the main guy said we've had one since November... little bit of silence later and the guy gave the girl with the long hair an excuse to cover himself, and he said 'oh yeah, that's what I meant' eh, no you didn't, you tried to be a smart ass and you totally forgot about the monitor that's been there since November. Retail or not, there's been a gsync monitor sitting in their offices for the past 10 months.
As for Freesync, in typical AMD fashion they have led people to believe that its going to be free, and there's no chance of that happening.
And amd have had a freesync monitor showing it to people for the past few months, reviewers are slated to get them later this year, doesn't really matter when reviewers have them if there's a delay from November of last year to late July\August this year for people to be able to buy them. Dunno about you but id prefer the option to be able to buy one as opposed to point scoring about when reviewers had them. Who really cares when reviewers have had them? Retails what i'm interested in.
That is not what the buffer does
See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aG2kIUerD4c&feature=player_detailpage#t=1806
Last edited:
Caporegime
You could have owned a Gsync monitor in January, there's a difference.
Gsync (Even though limited) was available only 3? months after its conception etc.
We're 6 months on with FreeSync and we're no closer to anything really.