AMD FreeSync vs Nvidia G-Sync - the adaptive sync battle

[eddyr]

Food for thought- AMD brought out low level access in the form of Mantle before dx12 was even announced (which is still not here yet) at no extra cost for their own user base (in contrast to Nvidia charging their user base for Gsync), and they were getting stick for "fragmenting the market"

If I'm not mistaken, the "freesync" monitor is basically just "generic adaptive sync monitor" in nature in terms of implementation, which mean Nvidia card should be able to support it as well, provided IF Nvidia would make their graphic card support it. If that is the case, I really think Nvidia would be better off supporting adaptive sync alongside Gsync as well, as it would at least give existing AMD users with "freesync (adaptive sync) monitor" to considering switching to the green team without the penality of losing the sync feature. Not supporting adaptive sync, it would mean Nvidia would be rejecting future customs from anyone that owns a freesync monitor, so they'd just be shooting themself in the foot.

But then again, they would probably put the potential profit on Gsync by denying Nvidia option on adaptive sync vs the potential profit from AMD users and freesync monitor owners that might switch camp in the future on the scale.

Given time it seems inevitable that they will support adaptive-sync, especially if Intel take it up in any way. But they are pretty intent on creating their ecosystem. So I expect they will hold off until they can differentiate G-sync, and since it is propriety they will be able to control minimum screen specs and make feature additions and changes more readily.

 

[Squink]

That will blow some minds on here, to much common sense.

I think most people know how businesses work. What blows the mind is that people actively worship the company in spite of it seeking to rip them off as much as possible. The usual suspects line up on the boards to defend the company to the hilt while effectively saying "lolz they're proper ripping me off lolz but they were clearly first with the technology"

 

[Rusty0611]

Ripping off isn't an objective measurement though. So although you may well have felt ripped off in similar situation doesn't mean that the people you're referring to feel ripped off as well.

 

[Squink]

Ripping off isn't an objective measurement though.

Fine then; it's people telling themselves that any price is a price worth paying to support their chosen faceless multi billion dollar corporation.

 

[pgi947]

Yep, shame on nvidia/amd for wanting to make money

 

[Gregster]

I think most people know how businesses work. What blows the mind is that people actively worship the company in spite of it seeking to rip them off as much as possible. The usual suspects line up on the boards to defend the company to the hilt while effectively saying "lolz they're proper ripping me off lolz but they were clearly first with the technology"

I don't think anyone who bought a G-Sync monitor feels or felt "ripped off". I also don't believe they are supporting/worshipping nVidia and bought the tech on what it can do. I have a good understanding of how business works and I also have a good understanding of how my finances work and for me, it was an easy choice to buy the ROG Swift, as it was an easy choice to buy 3 Titans, as it was an easy choice to buy a pizza.

I generally find the people who shout "the usual suspects" are those from the other camp. I personally don't care for nVidia or AMD but if they give me what I wan't, I will buy it.

 

[setter]

Myself, id like to see a few more gsync monitors similair to the swift, or a price drop on it soon. As ill likely be buying a gsync monitor soon and the swift is looking like the best option. Got nvidia cards already so freesync for me simply isn't an option.

 

[Squink]

Yep, shame on nvidia/amd for wanting to make money

No shame at all for a company wanting to maximise its profits. The shame comes when people accept this, yet are still joyous at the misfortune of another faceless corporation.

Take the cult of Apple. They'll have a big team of people calculating exactly how much extra they can charge for the 64gb phones over the 16gb ones. They probably pay $2 for the extra memory but charge an extra $80 to $100 for the 64gb phone. That's fine; they are trying to maximise their profits. What's less than fine are the people with three 128gb idevices actively denigrating Android users, whilst Steve Jobs' multi billion dollar estate keeps growing.

If no one was stupidly partisan about their favoured faceless corporation and picked based on value, the market would be a lot more customer focused than it is now.

 

[Gregster]

Myself, id like to see a few more gsync monitors similair to the swift, or a price drop on it soon. As ill likely be buying a gsync monitor soon and the swift is looking like the best option. Got nvidia cards already so freesync for me simply isn't an option.

Knowing nVidia, when the first Freesync monitors drop, they will cut the price and compete that way. It could even pay for them to take the monetary hit and subsidise the monitors to sell GPUs (of which they make a tidy profit). It would be nice to see alternatives to the Swift, as we all know (or should all know), Asus ROG come's at a price.

The Acer 4K is a decent price and at £450?, that is very fair. I would jump to a bigger screen (preferably 40") on 4K and 100Hz plus. I would happily take a TN over an IPS as well.

 

[Squink]

I generally find the people who shout "the usual suspects" are those from the other camp. I personally don't care for nVidia or AMD but if they give me what I wan't, I will buy it.

What other camp? The camp of wanting the best value for money, regardless of which company produces it? But of course as you say that you "don't care for nvidia or amd" I'm sure there'll be lots of forum readers sweeping their eyebrows off the floor at your claims of neutrality.

 

[bru]

This is one of those ideas that needs to have longlivity for which ever tech you go for. Some of us may upgrade our GPU's fairly often but most of us keep our monitors for a good few years.

On the Nvidia side you have the fact that is not connected to a VESA standard, but Nvidia do generally keep supporting their own technologies.
On the AMD side, it is connected to a VESA standard, but AMD do have a habit of not doing things themselves which can lead to technologies not being supported after a while.

I do hope that both Sync technologies are with us for a good few years, as I wouldn't like to see anyone caught out in the cold with a monitor that they cannot use the extra features of.

 

[setter]

4k would be great, but then there's the gpu horsepower to run it, and do it justice. Which I think wont be the next iteration of gpu's. 2560x1440 seems to be the sweetspot. As for Asus Rog markup, I can certainly agree due to owning one of their motherboards, a cheaper one would probably allow me to OC the same. But sad as it may sound it looks fantastic.

 

[Gregster]

4k would be great, but then there's the gpu horsepower to run it, and do it justice. Which I think wont be the next iteration of gpu's. 2560x1440 seems to be the sweetspot. As for Asus Rog markup, I can certainly agree due to owning one of their motherboards, a cheaper one would probably allow me to OC the same. But sad as it may sound it looks fantastic.

Having played with so many different motherboards, the ROG brand is worth it from my playing.

 

[ICDP]

What other camp? The camp of wanting the best value for money, regardless of which company produces it? But of course as you say that you "don't care for nvidia or amd" I'm sure there'll be lots of forum readers sweeping their eyebrows off the floor at your claims of neutrality.

LOL, was he serious when he typed that?

 

[meldarthx]

Knowing nVidia, when the first Freesync monitors drop, they will cut the price and compete that way. It could even pay for them to take the monetary hit and subsidise the monitors to sell GPUs (of which they make a tidy profit). It would be nice to see alternatives to the Swift, as we all know (or should all know), Asus ROG come's at a price.

The Acer 4K is a decent price and at £450?, that is very fair. I would jump to a bigger screen (preferably 40") on 4K and 100Hz plus. I would happily take a TN over an IPS as well.

Again Greg they can't cut prices until they change how g-sync is made. Those chips aren't cheap; and Nvidia won't want to cut their licensing fees either.

This is why you only see 6-7 models - they put in Nvidia's custom scaler which costs more than a standard Scaler....

*this also has lead to the theory; which is sound; Nvidia's cards can't use adaptive sync until they change their scaler on their cards as they can't do it unlike AMD's which can for a few generations now*

Which do you see monitor manufacturers using for most of their monitors; standardized scaler; *which now includes active-sync* or a much more expensive custome scaler from Nvidia?

Until Nvidia changes how its manufactured; not going to happen as Nvidia won't want to cut their margines.

They will end up adopting it when Intel does....and we'll most likely see that with next cpus...but its a wait and see....

 

[KillBoY_UK]

Food for thought- AMD brought out low level access in the form of Mantle before dx12 was even announced (which is still not here yet) at no extra cost for their own user base (in contrast to Nvidia charging their user base for Gsync), and they were getting stick for "fragmenting the market"

Freesycn/Gsycn have no effect on game developers that have to do next to nothing.

Where something like mantel will split developer resourse as they have two sets of API's to support. Also being a "to the metal" API will result in poor performance of newer cards in older games as they have to be developed for. You Just have to look at The performance of Thief on Mantel with a 285 to see that.

Vendor Locked Freesycn/Gync would not fully fragment the monitor market. As you can you use a Gsync monitor on a AMD card and vice version you just wont be able to use the Gsync bit, so no worse than hooking up you HDMI/DVI only card to a screen which also has DP.

 

[Gregster]

Again Greg they can't cut prices until they change how g-sync is made. Those chips aren't cheap; and Nvidia won't want to cut their licensing fees either.

This is why you only see 6-7 models - they put in Nvidia's custom scaler which costs more than a standard Scaler....

*this also has lead to the theory; which is sound; Nvidia's cards can't use adaptive sync until they change their scaler on their cards as they can't do it unlike AMD's which can for a few generations now*

Which do you see monitor manufacturers using for most of their monitors; standardized scaler; *which now includes active-sync* or a much more expensive custome scaler from Nvidia?

Until Nvidia changes how its manufactured; not going to happen as Nvidia won't want to cut their margines.

They will end up adopting it when Intel does....and we'll most likely see that with next cpus...but its a wait and see....

I think nVidia know what is what and what they need to do. In fact, I would be surprised if they do adopt A-Sync, as they have a massive lead in the market on discrete GPUs and hold a 70/30 % favour. It is AMD who need to do something (and quickly) to try and win back some consumers.

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/41838...deo-card-market-share-gap-over-amd/index.html

The A-Sync monitors are aimed at 30% of the market and the G-Sync monitors are aimed at 70% of the market. Now of course not 70% of the market can use G-Sync, as some of the systems will be too old (pre 6 series cards) and the same goes for AMD and not 30% of the market will be able to use A-Sync monitors (again, hardware pre-R9 290).

Another point of interest is the amount of interest in this sync technology. Having seen multiple G-Sync and Freesync threads, there doesn't seem to be much interest in either and only the odd few stating "I will be getting it". That of course is just my reading and others will buy of course that don't post.

Anyways, I am sure Freesync will be good and hopefully it is as good as G-Sync and my AMD brothers can enjoy tear free and stutter free gaming like I do

 

[Klo]

I think nVidia know what is what and what they need to do. In fact, I would be surprised if they do adopt A-Sync, as they have a massive lead in the market on discrete GPUs and hold a 70/30 % favour. It is AMD who need to do something (and quickly) to try and win back some consumers.

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/41838...deo-card-market-share-gap-over-amd/index.html

The A-Sync monitors are aimed at 30% of the market and the G-Sync monitors are aimed at 70% of the market. Now of course not 70% of the market can use G-Sync, as some of the systems will be too old (pre 6 series cards) and the same goes for AMD and not 30% of the market will be able to use A-Sync monitors (again, hardware pre-R9 290).

Another point of interest is the amount of interest in this sync technology. Having seen multiple G-Sync and Freesync threads, there doesn't seem to be much interest in either and only the odd few stating "I will be getting it". That of course is just my reading and others will buy of course that don't post.

Anyways, I am sure Freesync will be good and hopefully it is as good as G-Sync and my AMD brothers can enjoy tear free and stutter free gaming like I do

I have a feeling it won't be major selling point, and will instead become a standard feature of middle to high end screens that people take for granted.

 

[r7slayer]

Yep, shame on nvidia/amd for wanting to make money

i thought AMD wasn't making money? Reason why everyone is predicting their demise? Or more so pointed out by the greener ppl on this forum!

 

[Gregster]

I have a feeling it won't be major selling point, and will instead become a standard feature of middle to high end screens that people take for granted.

Yer, you could be right on that. Something that is a given in 5 years time perhaps.