-
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 freesync coming soon, no extra costs.... shocker
- Thread starter drunkenmaster
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,150
When it comes to price for it to be truly comparable you need the same monitor's on the same brand. This way you don't have brand tax involved. The closest we have atm is already listed in this thread. Even with Pg's point's taken into consideration there is still a big difference.
Caporegime
The only one with brand tax at the moment is Asus, if I was going to incorporate brand tax I'd make a big deal of the Acer being cheaper than the Asus.
Brands like AOC etc are inferior to Acer, and they had a price parity, they don't now, it's 70 quid difference now.
Caporegime
$10 or $20 wasn't it? that's the cost of the new Display Port, as I understand it that's the item costed, somewhere between £10 or £20, £15?
That's true.
Soldato
And quit I will do, like I posted above its pointless talking about Price till there out in the shops for us to buy.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,150
For me i would rather have it Asus v Asus, Acer v Acer etc etc. It just takes out as much variables as possible.
Caporegime
10-20 dollars was what's quoted as cost , but that could could easily translate to 20-30 end cost for a UK Customer, as 1.) Exchange rat + TAX etc 2.) We don't buy at cost prices rates, they'll likely add on extra to the cost, or their profit margin lowers.
Caporegime
Could have sworn you were fine talking about pricing when it was "free".
But I'll let you off.
It'd be illogical for any vendor to have two identical products with one factually inferior at the same price. Realistically, there will and should be a difference (I'm not arguing that). It's more the misguided inflated figure at how much more.
Last edited:
Ulmb is part of Gsync no?
If it isn't native 3D it doesn't count as a feature-it's another added cost.
Isn't any 120hz+ non native 3D panel monitor 3Dvision capable if Nvidia give the thumbs up due to the gpu outputting twin 60Hz signals?
Ulmb was basically a hidden feature of 3dvision 2.0, when people started using hacks to enable lightboost (a monitor feature of 2.0 spec) to reduce motion blur in 2d nvidia caught on and made it a standard option within the new gsync monitors.
As for what specifically makes a 3dvision monitor different to other 120hz+ panels I genuinely couldn't give you an answer, it may just be firmware or in the case of lightboost in 2.0 it may be something entirely different to non 3dvision monitors. Someone more educated on the ins and outs of monitor tech would be able to give a better answer.
Though my original point still stands, when looking at added cost, the feature set should be as near as identical as possible
Soldato
My sammy does lightboost and it isn't 3Dvision compatible, it isn't Nvidia specific and can be enabled through the panel if it's capable.
TheGsync panel doesn't have an inbuilt emitter, in theory there is no extra cost for 3Dvision 'ready', which makes it the most comparable panel in regards to possible Gsync cost.
TheGsync panel doesn't have an inbuilt emitter, in theory there is no extra cost for 3Dvision 'ready', which makes it the most comparable panel in regards to possible Gsync cost.
Soldato
Gsync is a physical scaler which is of NV design, how it differs from other ones is obviously something NV would have to answer, although I know it has an additional memory buffer. It's something you're paying money for is the point. FreeSync is part of VESA spec so it will probably stick with scalers available on the market. Ones that might I add aren't specifically designed to eliminate tearing.
You decide which is potentially better!
You decide which is potentially better!
Caporegime
The scalers that Free-Sync will be using are Variable rate, just like the Nvidia G-Sync module. the only difference is those Scallers don't need to carry their own memory as they do not need to cache frames.
Nvidia use their own variable scaler because there was no variable V-Blank compatibility between the DP and the scaler.
AMD fixed that the right way, by making that compatibility issue a compatibility VESA standard.
Soldato
Plus Freesync also supports a wider refresh range, then Gsync... So long I dont after drop the frame rate down on CSGO to help with input lag I be very happy.
On Gsync you must cap the frame rate to 120fps, not good when everyone else is running 300fps you put your self as a disadvantage.
What I really want to try is Freesync 144fps vs no sync at 300fps... With Vsync the difference is massive even when the game is locked solid at 120fps
At 300fps you feel more one, two one with the game. Really want that 1440p Though
On Gsync you must cap the frame rate to 120fps, not good when everyone else is running 300fps you put your self as a disadvantage.
What I really want to try is Freesync 144fps vs no sync at 300fps... With Vsync the difference is massive even when the game is locked solid at 120fps
At 300fps you feel more one, two one with the game. Really want that 1440p Though
Soldato
It's not just used for caching frames. So you think VESA spec is going to account for frame loss at the same pace considering its implemented in every certified panel at the same performance as a custom designed ASIC with built in buffer?
Keep digging, I err, I mean talking
Soldato
Plus Freesync also supports a wider refresh range, then Gsync... So long I dont after drop the frame rate down on CSGO to help with input lag I be very happy.
On Gsync you must cap the frame rate to 120fps, not good when everyone else is running 300fps you put your self as a disadvantage.
What I really want to try is Freesync 144fps vs no sync at 300fps... With Vsync the difference is massive even when the game is locked solid at 120fps
At 300fps you feel more one, two one with the game. Really want that 1440p Though
Right now freesync doesn't support anything as its not out yet. Its all speculation.
Soldato
The Spec sheet has already been talked about.. You can read it just by Google
It supports a wider Refresh rate range.
Save you looking here
What is the supported range of refresh rates with FreeSync and DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync?
A: AMD Radeon™ graphics cards will support a wide variety of dynamic refresh ranges with Project FreeSync. Using DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync, the graphics card can detect and set an appropriate maximum and minimum refresh rate based on the capabilities reported by the display. Potential ranges include 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz.
Caporegime
Well, regardless of the extra cost of Freesync, I am sure it will do a grand job and nobody is forced to buy it if they feel the cost for the first Freesync monitors is too much. 10$ or 20$ equates to £15 max, so not too much extra cost for the free version of G-Sync.
They also said they have more than one vendor on board, so that's good as well.
They also said they have more than one vendor on board, so that's good as well.
Caporegime
It doesn't only equate to 15 pound max though, as it's cost price that's risen by that, if they sell it to us at the cost price, their profit margin would lower.
Soldato
We don't know this till we can buy. It's pointless talking about it right now.
Caporegime
I didn't know how else to write such a sarcastic post about freesync not actually being free. I had to add that to make the rest of the sarcasm work
If we only talked about fact, there wouldn't be any point to any of these threads.