• 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.

Are Nvidia Going to Support Freesync?

drunkenmaster said:
Yes I know what the op is asking which is precisely why I answered it. The fact is if you want to be pedantic or not, if the OP is wondering if Nvidia will come out and state they will support freesync the answer is never, if you rephrase the question to will they support adaptive sync(to some level) the answer changes from no to yes.

When getting the words right changes the answer to the question, yes, it's right to be pedantic, or otherwise known as correct.

We've seen multiple threads and even more posts in other threads asking if Nvidia will support freesync AND responses from Nvidia exec types who have stated they won't support freesync.

The distinction is very important. Teaching people they have the wording wrong is important because the idea Nvidia/the industry is putting out is that Nvidia won't support freesync and a lot of people are incorrectly taking that to mean Nvidia won't support adaptive sync, the distinction here is incredibly important otherwise people will continue to mix them up and get the wrong idea of what is going on.
Click to expand...

Do you honestly think Nvidia will support adaptive sync on desktop?

You have way more faith in them than I do. I think they will just keep pushing g-sync.
 
Tom Peterson has expressed that there is more to come with G-Sync and he doesn't see the need to support Adaptive Sync (the open standard) but didn't say they wouldn't. Whilst nVidia have had G-Sync out for a year, I imagine they want to stick with the tech they have for now and that makes most sense.
 
andybird123 said:
funny people should mention 3D... can anyone find a monitor that supports AMD 3D / Tridef?
That was also open and "free" for a good long while

freesync stands a better chance if it actually costs monitor makers nothing to implement, but at the same time there will be very little pushing nvidia to support it if the actual uptake is low - with AMD's market share it isn't going to be a massive seller until nvidia do support it
Click to expand...


Does anyone actually game in 3D? I've not seen anyone mention it for ages.
 
Minstadave said:
Does anyone actually game in 3D? I've not seen anyone mention it for ages.
Click to expand...

I love gaming in 3D (passive), but there is so little choice in screens, and while I had a passive 3D monitor (now donated to other half), moving screens just to play in 3D became a pain.

I would love a 4K passive 3D monitor, but I doubt it will ever happen :(
 
Gregster said:
Tom Peterson has expressed that there is more to come with G-Sync and he doesn't see the need to support Adaptive Sync (the open standard) but didn't say they wouldn't. Whilst nVidia have had G-Sync out for a year, I imagine they want to stick with the tech they have for now and that makes them more money.
Click to expand...

Fixed.
 
andybird123 said:
funny people should mention 3D... can anyone find a monitor that supports AMD 3D / Tridef?
That was also open and "free" for a good long while

freesync stands a better chance if it actually costs monitor makers nothing to implement, but at the same time there will be very little pushing nvidia to support it if the actual uptake is low - with AMD's market share it isn't going to be a massive seller until nvidia do support it
Click to expand...

Pretty much every 120hz+ monitor supports AMD 3d/tridef. Unlike 3dvision which blacklists monitors that don't pay to license it AMD don't. They don't require a monitor pay to licence and brand it AMD 3d capable. a screen is 3d capable or not, then on top of that it also must pay Nvidia to work with Nvidia drivers, AMD do not require that additional step.

The Samsung 700d I have right here works with 3d for AMD, it is not branded as such because it doesn't require it.

I don't use it because I hate 3d, I like 120hz, brighter screens and with less ghosting/issues. Now, 3d on a screen with 200hz + with high hz per eye, that might be a decent experience but ultimately VR appeals to me much more so will see how that progresses in the future. independent screens, no flickering, but it's own downsides. I'll try it out when res improves, quality improves and it becomes more finalised but I'm not too fussed about that either.
 
What 120hz monitors?
There currently arent any non-3Dvision/120hz 3d monitors for sale

The eizo 120/240hz monitor is the only one i can find and doesnt support 3d

Your samsung is no longer on sale, and nor are any of the other 120hz/3d monitors

The only option for AMD 3d still on sale is the lg passive/60hz one that uses line interleaving (halving the resolution)

4k with passive 3d has the potential to be worthwhile mind
 
Last edited:
Minstadave said:
Will you still be happy paying a premium for G-Sync when a free alternative is available but Nvidia refuse to support it? That'd put me right off purchasing.
Click to expand...

AMD have said that adaptive sync/freesync needs hardware in the gpu, if that is hardware not present on nvidia cards then you would need a new Gpu to support adaptive sync, or keep your gpu and use gsync - with more gsync models coming out pricing is getting lower

It isnt really free, whichever way you look at it, it is going to cost you to support either in buying new hardware

I know ive paid a premium for Gsync, but ive also had it for many months already and I also get ulmb, 3d and 1440@120+ and I get to keep my 2 year old cards which I wouldnt with AMDs equivalent, even if I still had my gcn1 cards
 
Minstadave said:
Will you still be happy paying a premium for G-Sync when a free alternative is available but Nvidia refuse to support it? That'd put me right off purchasing.
Click to expand...

It depends on the premium in truth. The Acer 4K G-Sync at £450 was a proper steal to me but the ROG Swift was expensive but it is the first 1440P 144Hz monitor, the first 3D @ 1440P, ULMB mode (which I don't use personally) and so many other features, the price of £700 was easily justified for such good techs and the fact there was no competition to speak of allowed such premiums to be placed on top by Asus.

I have no regrets at all anyways :)
 
shankly1985 said:
You can't say that yet!

1. Freesync could be the better option
2. If it is the better option, why should manufactures continue to be charged buy Nvidia to use Gsync?
3. Freesync is free expect a lot, "a lot" of monitors..

No one on here can rule out Freesync just yet.
Click to expand...

What he said was quite correct though, as of right now nvidia dont need to support vesa adaptive sync... They only "need" to if you are correct in your other assumptions, that a lot of monitors come out with it and see big sales

Even Amd have pointed out that there is a cost to supporting adaptive sync, so monitor makers arent going to do that unless it drives sales and allows them to recoup those costs, it is licence free, but not actually free
 
Dunno if anyone has mentioned this yet but NV have to qualify each new gsync monitor and it seems like a serious drain on their resources. People have commented lately that they already have distractions with Tegra, if engineers can be freed up by adopting adaptive sync and letting the monitor mfr's do the work wouldn't they want that? Or am I misunderstanding how this works. Do AMD still have to qualify every single freesync panel?
 
andybird123 said:
What he said was quite correct though, as of right now nvidia dont need to support vesa adaptive sync... They only "need" to if you are correct in your other assumptions, that a lot of monitors come out with it and see big sales

Even Amd have pointed out that there is a cost to supporting adaptive sync, so monitor makers arent going to do that unless it drives sales and allows them to recoup those costs, it is licence free, but not actually free
Click to expand...

The only cost is the DisplayPort Chip something like $15 over other DP chips..
They is no premium a Manufacture needs to pay..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom