• 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

James J said:
Not yet no, but its tipped that it should be this fall that the first review model might pop up. For buying one though, probably Q1 next year at the earliest. I also don't think the name "freesync" will remain either, as its "project freesync", so it sounds to me like it'll get a rebrand to get away from the word "free" closer to the time.
Click to expand...

Cheers mate, but I knew that. It was more a question for the AMD rep :)
 
Last edited:
TheRealDeal said:
Which one. I can see Acer G-Sync monitors but i can't see the same monitor without the G-Sync feature.
Click to expand...

Shares same panel/feature set as other 'non' gsync monitors at no extra cost was my point. Applies for both their 4K and 1080 GSync offerings.

And those you listed are AOC not Acer.
 
Last edited:
pgi947 said:
Shares same panel/feature set as other 'non' gsync monitors at no extra cost was my point. Applies for both their 4K and 1080 GSync offerings.

And those you listed are AOC not Acer.
Click to expand...

Yea because Acer have only one 4k panel on here. Aoc have the same model with and without G-Sync so much easier to compare the price difference. LG Tv's use Samsung panels but are much cheaper. The only way to compare price is same model with and without G-Sync like i have shown above.
 
Last edited:
Those aren't the same minus GSync though, one of those is also holding 3DVision certification, the other isn't. By it being 3Dvision 2.0 certified (OK item description doesn't say this but trust me it is) it also comes with ULMB/Lightboost, the other doesn't.

So comparing the Acer 4K to the samsung, AOC, Asus etc 4K... isn't a valid comparison? They are identical in every way, bar the scaler used and the name on the front...Surely you're not that vein as to think a manufacturer has to release two of the same monitor, one with, one without to give an indication of extra cost? Its panel and feature set that should determine any extra cost.

All 28" 4K 1MS TN 'Gaming' monitors, all use the same panel, all offer the same feature set with exception to the Acer which features GSync on top:

Samsung: £446
AOC: £479
Acer: £499
Asus: £566

All 27" 144Hz 1MS 3Dvision 2.0 monitors, the Acer has GSync on top of this also:

Asus VG278HE: £349
Benq XL2720Z : £359
Acer XB270HA: £367
 
Last edited:
pgi947 said:
Those aren't the same minus GSync though, one of those is also holding 3DVision certification, the other isn't. By it being 3Dvision 2.0 certified (OK item description doesn't say this but trust me it is) it also comes with ULMB/Lightboost, the other doesn't.

So comparing the Acer 4K to the samsung, AOC, Asus etc 4K... isn't a valid comparison? They are identical in every way, bar the scaler used and the name on the front...Surely you're not that vein as to think a manufacturer has to release two of the same monitor, one with, one without to give an indication of extra cost? Its panel and feature set that should determine any extra cost.
Click to expand...

Name can change the price all on it's own which i doubt you will dispute. I think we all know G-Sync will come with added cost it's just a matter of how much. I just don't see a company licensing G-Sync and not recovering the expense through the retail price. The price on that Acer is really good though and i doubt there's much premium added on.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
How long it takes for something to become available after announcing it.

The winner is: [insert your brand and state your case here]

Has it come to this?
Click to expand...

Didn't this also happen When DX12 was announced?
There was a big fuss made about Mantle being available now and DX not being available for 18 months or something. It seemed important then...
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Didn't this also happen When DX12 was announced?
There was a big fuss made about Mantle being available now and DX not being available for 18 months or something. It seemed important then...
Click to expand...

You cant use logic when peoples favouritism is involved GM :)
Not sure why people cant see why new tech is good and often if its proprietary or costs another way to do it is found cheaper with the same or less features in the future.
I will say if gync is adding like 10quid to costs which atm it seems to be close at most who cares? Early adopters have always had a price premium on either side
 
TheRealDeal said:
Name can change the price all on it's own which i doubt you will dispute. I think we all know G-Sync will come with added cost it's just a matter of how much. I just don't see a company licensing G-Sync and not recovering the expense through the retail price. The price on that Acer is really good though and i doubt there's much premium added on.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's exactly what Nvidia should be doing if it wants wider adoption of its tech to lock in gamers into an "Nvidia echo system". All the R&D is already a sunk cost, and marginal cost of producing the pcb could be shared with the display panel makers, or just thrown in without any monetary cost to the panel makers. By keeping the cost of the panel same as it would otherwise be for the consumers for a monitor that does not have a Gsync module, Nvidia takes away any excuse for the consumers not to purchase a Gsync capable monitor, when comparing like monitors. Nvidia wins by selling more of its gpus that are compatible with the Gsync capable monitors, and makes its customers stickier as these customers would be unlikely to leave the "Nvidia Echo System" and would be reluctant to make the switch to an AMD card, even if AMD came out with a slightly better performing gpu.

At least, this is what I would do, if I were Nvidia.

Now, as a consumer, I know that echo systems exist for the benefit of the seller and not the buyer, given all things being equal. Thus, I hope that the roll out of the adaptive vsync standard can be accelerated so that it can gain wider adoption quicker for the benefit of all gamers, and not just gamers tied to a specific brand. In the end, I (as a consumer) only care about me, and this would hopefully translate into sustainably more competitive pricing for all displays with this "feature" or capability enabled as a standard, rather than a premium option.
 
Last edited:
provost said:
Actually, that's exactly what Nvidia should be doing if it wants wider adoption of its tech to lock in gamers into an "Nvidia echo system". All the R&D is already is a sunk cost, and marginal cost of producing the pcb could be shared with the display panel maker, or just thrown in without any monetary cost to the panel makers. By keeping the cost of the panel same as it would have been for the consumers without the Gsync module, it makes for a no brainer purchase when comparing like monitors. Nvidia wins by selling more of its gpus that are compatible with the Gsync capable monitors, and makes its customers stickier as these customers would be unlikely to leave the "Nvidia Echo System" and would be reluctant to make the switch to an AMD card, even if AMD came out with a slightly better performing gpu.

At least, this is what I would do, if I were Nvidia.

Now, as a consumer, I know that echo systems exist for the benefit of the seller ad not the buyer, given all things being equal. Thus, I hope that the roll out of the adaptive vsync standard can be accelerated so that it can gain wider adoption quicker for the benefit of all gamers, and not just gamers tied to a specific brand. In the end, I (as a consumer) only care about me, and this would hopefully translate into sustainably more competitive pricing for all displays with this "feature" or capability included as a standard, rather than a premium option.
Click to expand...

Its the monitor manufacturer who pays Nvidia to use G-sync so its upto the manufacturer how much it wants to charge. G-Sync as you say is a good way to lock people in to Nvidia hardware. Most Nvidia diehards wont mind this but I think people that have no preferance will wait for adaptive sync as it should in theory give you more freedom and the same effects.
 
TheRealDeal said:
Its the monitor manufacturer who pays Nvidia to use G-sync so its upto the manufacturer how much it wants to charge. G-Sync as you say is a good way to lock people in to Nvidia hardware. Most Nvidia diehards wont mind this but I think people that have no preferance will wait for adaptive sync as it should in theory give you more freedom and the same effects.
Click to expand...

It'll also be up to the manufacturers if and how much extra they charge for monitors with the adaptive sync feature. Might not cost them anything, but that doesn't mean they won't charge extra for it. Again, like with GSync, the only way we'll know is if they release 2 identical monitors except that one has adaptive sync and one doesn't.

The other issue is that if Nvidia don't support an adaptive sync method of doing this, then an adaptive sync monitor is effectively just as tied to AMD as GSync is Nvidia. Unless Intel implement it too, but I don't imagine people will be switching from AMD GPU to Intel ones for it to be an issue.
 
TheRealDeal said:
Its the monitor manufacturer who pays Nvidia to use G-sync so its upto the manufacturer how much it wants to charge. G-Sync as you say is a good way to lock people in to Nvidia hardware. Most Nvidia diehards wont mind this but I think people that have no preferance will wait for adaptive sync as it should in theory give you more freedom and the same effects.
Click to expand...

Yes, so what I am saying is that Nvidia can make this cost negligible for the manufacturers so that they have even a greater incentive to include it in their displays, and agree on a mutually acceptable price point so both Nvidia and the display makers can achieve what they are looking for from this arrangement. Or, Nvidia can structure a back end royalty stream based on panel manufacturers paying Nvidia ( profit sharing), once a certain sales threshold has been achieved. There are numerous ways to skin this cat, and I am sure that Nvidia and panel manufacturers have thought and discussed through these all in their negotiations.
I think it is naive to assume that people who want to upgrade now would want to wait for a tech in the future, when they can get instant gratification now, if this is indeed what the are looking for in a monitor.
It is especially true in this case, as there are very few technical details available on the rollout of adaptive vsyn, and even more uncertain timeframe for its release.
 
Last edited:
GoogalyMoogaly said:
It'll also be up to the manufacturers if and how much extra they charge for monitors with the adaptive sync feature. Might not cost them anything, but that doesn't mean they won't charge extra for it. Again, like with GSync, the only way we'll know is if they release 2 identical monitors except that one has adaptive sync and one doesn't.

The other issue is that if Nvidia don't support an adaptive sync method of doing this, then an adaptive sync monitor is effectively just as tied to AMD as GSync is Nvidia. Unless Intel implement it too, but I don't imagine people will be switching from AMD GPU to Intel ones for it to be an issue.
Click to expand...

Adaptive Sync in the future will be in just about every monitor by default. Displayport 3.0 has it by default and displayport is becoming ever more popular. G-Sync on the other hand does not have this advantage. I think Nvidia at some point will have no option but to use adaptive sync or risk losing sales. Off course if G-Sync is better they could support both.
 
TheRealDeal said:
Adaptive Sync in the future will be in just about every monitor by default. Displayport 3.0 has it by default and displayport is becoming ever more popular. G-Sync on the other hand does not have this advantage. I think Nvidia at some point will have no option but to use adaptive sync or risk losing sales. Off course if G-Sync is better they could support both.
Click to expand...

Nvidia don't sit on their hands, so by the time DP3 is the norm, gsync will have gone through changes to make it a very appealing product.
 
provost said:
Yes, so what I am saying is that Nvidia can make this cost negligible for the manufacturers so that they have even a greater incentive to include it in their displays, and agree on a mutually acceptable price point so both Nvidia and the display makers can achieve what they are looking for from this arrangement. Or, Nvidia can structure a back end royalty stream based on panel manufacturers paying Nvidia ( profit sharing), once a certain sales threshold has been achieved. There are numerous ways to skin this cat, and I am sure that Nvidia and panel manufacturers have thought and discussed through these all in their negotiations.
I think it is naive to assume that people who want to upgrade now would want to wait for a tech in the future, when they can get instant gratification now, if this is indeed what the are looking for in a monitor.
It is especially true in this case, as there are very few technical details available on the rollout of adaptive vsyn, and even more uncertain timeframe for its release.
Click to expand...

I dont think the kit itself is that cheap. You can buy the G-Sync kit and install it yourself. Without looking I think it was around £100. I understand what you are saying and I think Nvidia are doing this to lock people in especially as they are first to market. People that are not flush with cash may well wait to see what happens with adaptive sync as they probably dont change monitor much.
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
It'll also be up to the manufacturers if and how much extra they charge for monitors with the adaptive sync feature. Might not cost them anything, but that doesn't mean they won't charge extra for it. Again, like with GSync, the only way we'll know is if they release 2 identical monitors except that one has adaptive sync and one doesn't.

The other issue is that if Nvidia don't support an adaptive sync method of doing this, then an adaptive sync monitor is effectively just as tied to AMD as GSync is Nvidia. Unless Intel implement it too, but I don't imagine people will be switching from AMD GPU to Intel ones for it to be an issue.
Click to expand...

Intel may have its own reasons for adopting it, not the least of it is that it views Nvidia as a competitor in certain product categories. And, if Intel ever decides to support the a-sync technology in whatever shape way or form, we can be certain that it will become the industry standard, since Intel can throw more money at "incentifying" its "partners" than both Nvidia and AMD combined.
But, we are talking in hypotheticals, since the only game in town is Gsync at this time. We can only play the hand that we have in a game, not the cards that we wish or hope we had....lol
 
James J said:
Nvidia don't sit on their hands, so by the time DP3 is the norm, gsync will have gone through changes to make it a very appealing product.
Click to expand...

Or it will be extinct. I just think eventually Nvidia will be ****ing into the wind with G-Sync more and more as the market gets flooded with adaptive sync monitors. As you say though Nvidia are a smart company so we shall see.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom