• 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

Time will tell how this stacks against G-Sync and hopefully, not to many people need a new monitor for it.

It does get better for us gamers, that is certain and loving the AMD Vs nVidia with the big boys. I am sure there is another twist to come.
 
Gregster said:
Time will tell how this stacks against G-Sync and hopefully, not to many people need a new monitor for it.

It does get better for us gamers, that is certain and loving the AMD Vs nVidia with the big boys. I am sure there is another twist to come.
Click to expand...

I like my 7950s but actually can't wait to get back to Nvidia, just a personal preference. I never had any issues with them.

That said I won't be paying extra for anything until I know its not a fad.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Layte, it's okay, you seemingly purposefully misinterpreted what Anandtech said, then mentioned 3dvision hardware as a reason the software was different, and decided me responding directly to both these points wasn't relevant....... a sure sign that you have no argument, I'll miss you.
Click to expand...

Oh god... I promised myself I would stay away, but it's 2am and I cannot sleep.

Anyway, I have to ask. Do you purposely ignore what people say, and instead reply to the post you think they made? It's a very good tactic for shutting down discussion. Especially when combined with a rambling wall of text that often has entire unrelated paragraphs of text within.
 
redrooster303 said:
I like my 7950s but actually can't wait to get back to Nvidia, just a personal preference. I never had any issues with them.

That said I won't be paying extra for anything until I know its not a fad.
Click to expand...

My disappointment comes from gaming on a 120Hz Asus monitor and then gaming on a 1440P Dell monitor. The colours are far deeper and the image looks clearer but I need v-Syncto stop the tearing and that in turn brings in lag, so it puts me off gaming on the Dell.

I am a green fan at heart and loving the competition from the GPU men. Quite possibly we will need 2 machines to cater fir the best of our games and I have said we were heading this way for months and months but if it does happen like that, then so be it. I will happily build another computer to accommodate an AMD GPU or 2.
 
Gregster said:
My disappointment comes from gaming on a 120Hz Asus monitor and then gaming on a 1440P Dell monitor. The colours are far deeper and the image looks clearer but I need v-Syncto stop the tearing and that in turn brings in lag, so it puts me off gaming on the Dell.

I am a green fan at heart and loving the competition from the GPU men. Quite possibly we will need 2 machines to cater fir the best of our games and I have said we were heading this way for months and months but if it does happen like that, then so be it. I will happily build another computer to accommodate an AMD GPU or 2.
Click to expand...

I too need to get myself a bigger screen, missing out bigtime.

I have always had NVidia cards but went AMD this time (just before 780 went down in price). I have my little HTPC with a gtx 460 in it.

That is until Maxwell aha.
 
I just want a high res 24" screen, with 120hz, 4k maybe, if prices take too long I'd happily take a 1600p or something. I just don't want one giant 30" screen. I game, but I code and watch tv, browse. I have 2 24" screens currently and very frequently game on one screen while having other crap going on with the other screen. It just doesn't really work doing that on 2x massive screens. I might go as far as a 27", though 25-26 would be nicer. 30" is just too big, it reduces the pixel density too far anyway and makes the dual screen thing too insane.

oled + 4k + 27-28" screen is probably going to be my next major screen upgrade. I think some 1080p, maybe even a 1440p 120hz freesync screen will probably be an in between step as oled + 4k being anywhere near the £400 mark is still at least a couple years off if not more.

I wish one of the manufacturers just got some balls, kitted out all their fabs for oleds, starting selling them for low prices, but they'd corner the market in months, have a huge lead on the competition. If you told me today I could get an oled for £1000 but the blue led's might die in 3 years, I wouldn't risk it. if it was £400-500 and might only last 3 years, the response time, colour quality, refresh rates and low persistence I'd easily spend that much and just buy again in a few years if the blue led thing really is an issue.
 
They'll likely jump straight to pushing 4k as a standard because of content. The push towards and then mostly getting stuck at 1080p was content available for it. Average user knows film/tv comes in 1080p so that is what they want. 4k content is the next standard so what the industry is now pushing towards. Not a bad thing, just a shame. They could have pushed 1440/1600 into 24" screens for good pricing years ago. THe industry seemed to have no drive to do so, because they are stupid.

High def pc gaming somewhat stuck at 1080p........ when mobile phones use the same definition, it's ridiculous.

Haven't seen well priced 4k screens yet, some crappy tv 39" that went to like $900 but it could only do 4k at 30hz, so almost useless for gaming. A sub £500 60hz really good 4k screen, some ways off, oled version even further off.
 
drunkenmaster said:
I find it funny that when I post a fact that shows Nvidia in a bad light, it's just hate, it's never Nvidia doing something meh that people shouldn't actually support, it's purely me hating on Nvidia.

The entire g-sync situation which I have seemingly called perfectly from the start, has been describe as hate by Nvidia people on this forum, rather than simply technical information which is all it was.

Go back and read my posts and the responses. I said Nvidia can't patent it, that gets called hate, I point out how simple the idea is, I get called as posting rubbish because I hate Nvidia. I was actually just describing the situation and what would almost certainly happen and I used examples(3dvision, sli, etc) to point out that this is generally how Nvidia has done things for donkeys years.

I dislike what Nvidia do in general to try and lock their own customers in, AMD out, and screw the industry as a by product.... I've yet to see anyone explain why these are good things or why loving the idea would be "normal".

If nvidia turn around and stop screwing everyone over as the default mode, I'll be happy, if they do something genuinely good for the industry you'll see me support it. If AMD intentionally screw over their customers, you'll see me complain about it. Maybe you could e-mail AMD and ask them to do more bad things for me to complain about so I can prove it to you.




In reality power saving is something monitor makers are VERY in to and would support, but it would be heavily biased towards mobile and trying to get manufacturers to put in any more effort than required when they don't need to becomes a blood from stone type of situation. I could see them happily do this on all their screens meant for mobile but if there was a 1p cost per monitor in desktop to add the feature they'd hold back as long as possible.

The screen industry is a complete joke, 1080p the best you can still do at 24" screen(I think I maybe have seen like one higher res smallish scree) while you can get a 4" mobile screen at 1080p......... it's insane, it's always been insane. At least, thank ****, we've seen some 4k 28" screens being done. It probably wouldn't have surprised me to see 4k screens starting at 40".

I've wanted a couple super high def but 22-27" screens for the past 5 years, and frankly, no reason at all they haven't been standard for that long.

One of the issues is seriously stupid Vesa standards, no one agreeing on cabling and general standards for higher res. Nothing over 1080p at 120hz for so long is mostly down to the lack of choosing or creating a cable and standard that can run say a 1600p, or 4k screen at 120hz. Pretty much all it would take is some sensible thinking and agreeing on a choice between everyone....... asking grown men to agree on something in business is insane.

You have one company who probably has some stake in HDMI, would get 2p per screen so is arguing for that, another guy who wants to save the 6p per screen having 3hdmi ports would mean and so wants display port, etc.

Essentially there hasn't been much reason since lcd's were made for "g-sync" to have been a fundamental feature of the first screens made. Just, the industry was set in their refresh rate thinking, and so that's what they continued to do, madness. It's not AMD/Nvidia/Industry who did it first, it's, why didn't any of these idiots do this 10 years ago. It's pretty much mental.
Click to expand...

A points a point dm just saying a lot of you're posts are bashing them. I cannot remember any posts from yourself slating AMD or I wouldn't of said anything
 
Last edited:
drunkenmaster said:
They'll likely jump straight to pushing 4k as a standard because of content. The push towards and then mostly getting stuck at 1080p was content available for it. Average user knows film/tv comes in 1080p so that is what they want. 4k content is the next standard so what the industry is now pushing towards. Not a bad thing, just a shame. They could have pushed 1440/1600 into 24" screens for good pricing years ago. THe industry seemed to have no drive to do so, because they are stupid.

High def pc gaming somewhat stuck at 1080p........ when mobile phones use the same definition, it's ridiculous.

Haven't seen well priced 4k screens yet, some crappy tv 39" that went to like $900 but it could only do 4k at 30hz, so almost useless for gaming. A sub £500 60hz really good 4k screen, some ways off, oled version even further off.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with all your posts drunkenmaster, not because I don't like what you say, but because on the odd occasion you let your bias come into it. You make some good posts, so don't spoil them.

I like Nvidia better but that's just me, it might change next year if they fetch something really good out(glory supporter, lol). Its not like football where your a team for life n all that (LEEDS, LEEDS, LEEDS).

Anyway who am I kiddin, each to their own.

I don't post much here but I do take notice.

I hope your wrong 'but I think you may be right', the steps of resolution (good RPG title) could be going with consoles meaning that now they (consoles) have stepped up to 1080P, we are stuck with that for now. This would mean they would skip 1200P,1440P,1600P until consoles catch up to 4K in 6 years (or so).

Its sad but true isn't it. (No matter what we say on our enthusiast forums).

Things need to change and I think that's what valve are going for. Steam Box may bring some main stream to the audiences and then they can work on Res.

All these (Free or G? lets say F)... F-sync fixes will come in handy on the steambox driver.

I really hope so because otherwise were stuck at 1080p mainstream and maybe 1440p enthusiast(ish) until consoles evolve.

Maybe if people can see the benefits of PC gaming we'll be sorted. THIS IS WHERE STEAM COMES IN.

Cybers steam box doesn't look bad($499), can 8 pack and OCUK fetch another TITAN (maybe 780 and call the finished steambox a TITAN) to the market in the form of their own steam box(£599)for the masses. Hope so.
 
Last edited:
drunkenmaster said:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7641/amd-demonstrates-freesync-free-gsync-alternative-at-ces-2014
So Nvidia fans, are you once again happy to be charged extra for something monitor makers already fully intended to support FOR FREE, and that only Nvidia hardware buyers will be forced into the extra cost or locked out via drivers for the product you've paid for?
Click to expand...

The NVIDIA "fans" have 120hz or 144hz monitor, because many use Nvision. And they are not affected by the issues that appear on 60hz monitors.

Do your research, before you troll again :)
 
Panos said:
The NVIDIA "fans" have 120hz or 144hz monitor, because many use Nvision. And they are not affected by the issues that appear on 60hz monitors.

Do your research, before you troll again :)
Click to expand...

Errm, maybe do your research before you troll again, g-sync/freesync has precisely nothing to do with issues on 60hz monitors. Every g-sync monitor as yet listed is a 144hz monitor, most of the first ones are the most widely used current 144hz Nvidia branded monitors(3dvision, whatever other branding their monitors get) that are available from Asus/BenQ.

So you can buy a Asus 144hz screen without g-sync, or pay $150 or was it $200 more for the g-sync version of the 144hz screen, with g-sync working from, is it 30-144hz, or was it 45-144hz, either way.... g-sync is not a feature purely for 60hz screens so you're quite clearly talking rubbish.
 
imginy said:
Any chance it would work on 2012 Panasonic plasma?
Click to expand...

Pana never supports backward compatibility on anything, nor enables extra features on old products.

I'd say a 100% No.

There isn't even a certainty that the whole technology will even work properly for years or months. See how long it takes for mantle to come out and be optimized for more than one game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom