** ASUS DO IT AGAIN: IPS, 144Hz & FREESYNC!!! Asus MG279Q thread **
- Thread starter Gibbo
- Start date
Huge **** up on Asus' part. Firstly specifying a scaler only capable of doing 90hz adaptive synch, secondly a firmware bug rendering 144hz unusable, thirdly most users reporting faulty units (beyond the first 2 points).
Couldn't really get any worse ...
Computex starts on the 2nd of June. There'll be a ton of stuff announced in the lead up to and at the event itself.
Couldn't really get any worse ...
Computex starts on the 2nd of June. There'll be a ton of stuff announced in the lead up to and at the event itself.
I have a very hard time believing this. Whether you're knowingly spreading FUD or not, I'm pretty sure that is what it is - FUD.
I highly doubt it has anything to do with the VESA spec, and probably has everything to do with what the specified scaler/controller is capable of (or isn't as the case may be).
What may be true is that there isn't a scaler / controller yet that's suitable for IPS panels with this kind of adaptive synch range, not that it isn't possible ... and that's nothing to do with VESA or AMD.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,492
The core problem is that the AMD spec makes no guidelines on what the panel driver should be able to do to support a wider range, so the scaler makers and subsequently monitor makers are effectively working blind
The whole point of freesync was to undercut gsync on price, well this is the end result, AMD doing nothing to actually make sure that the "freesync" brand actually means anything
AMD came up with the spec, scaler makers implemented the standard, the fact the standard doesn't address half the issues of variable refresh (which are and have been in gsync) is directly AMD's fault
The whole point of freesync was to undercut gsync on price, well this is the end result, AMD doing nothing to actually make sure that the "freesync" brand actually means anything
AMD came up with the spec, scaler makers implemented the standard, the fact the standard doesn't address half the issues of variable refresh (which are and have been in gsync) is directly AMD's fault
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Jan 2008
- Posts
- 705
- Location
- UK
The FreeSync/ActiveSync system governs how frames with variable refresh intervals are generated by the GPU and sent over DP to the scaler in the monitor. It has absolutely zero to do with how the scaler delivers an image to the LCD panel. AMD can offer advice, but ultimately the responsibility to make sure that's done right lies partially with the scaler designers and partially with the monitor manufacturer. FS certification just ensures the monitor supports variable refresh when connected to a suitable AMD GPU.
With the way FS capable scalers and monitors have been rushed to market it's inevitable they'll have some issues at the start. That's one of the down-sides of an open standard like ActiveSync.
Was AMD right to build on ActiveSync rather than going with a locked-down proprietary solution like GSync? Six months from now FS monitor designs should be pretty solid, with all the major issues worked out. But GSync will still be a proprietary system with a significant cost disadvantage, and history records those almost never gain any real market acceptance.
A follow-up question, Jim - Why not 30Hz instead of 35Hz for the lower limit? Given that we still deal with 30fps limits on some AAA PC games (Dragon Age Inquisition's beautiful cutscenes completely break if you try to force a higher framerate, for example) I'd rather have 30-90Hz than 40-144Hz in terms of Adaptive Sync range.
I'm going to put my patient hat on and wait to see what happens here. The screen still sounds great in theory, and hopefully once some of the issues are ironed out it will live up to expectations.
I'm on the side of preferring the 35-90Hz freesync range (if I had to choose). It'll be interesting to see what the monitor reviewers make of it, and whether they agree with the choice. I'm guessing new tech combinations are always tricky to implement, and I'll bet the Asus engineers will do what they can to ensure the product. As there's such a passionate crowd of people on these forums and as the monitor costs a lot of money (relative to what most people spend on a monitor) expectations were always going to be high.
I'm on the side of preferring the 35-90Hz freesync range (if I had to choose). It'll be interesting to see what the monitor reviewers make of it, and whether they agree with the choice. I'm guessing new tech combinations are always tricky to implement, and I'll bet the Asus engineers will do what they can to ensure the product. As there's such a passionate crowd of people on these forums and as the monitor costs a lot of money (relative to what most people spend on a monitor) expectations were always going to be high.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,492
You've just repeated my point back to me.
AMD could have spent a bit of extra time to work out the kinks with the involvement of the scaler makers and monitor makers, they could have made freesync a competetive product to gsync, ultimately AMD control the freesync brand and have done nothing to protect it.
If you want to go by history, just look at how many AMD3D branded/supported monitors are still on sale vs. 3DVision. The exact same sloping shoulder approach to 3D support means you currently have to buy 4 separate products from 4 separate companies, none of whom guarantee any sort of support for each other's products.
AMD are palming off the majority of the R&D budget on to scaler makers and monitor makers and what we are seeing so far is that they haven't been willing to spend the extra R&D to develop the products themselves, where as they are perfectly willing to buy a ready made scaler from nvidia and just pass on the extra cost (and then some) to consumers.
R&D is a risk, nvidia have taken the risk with gsync, but no one on the AMD/VESA/Scaler makers side is currently willing to take that risk (obviously AMD's lack of GPU sales is a big factor on that side).
I don't have an official answer, though I would imagine that screens running at 30 Hz could have noticeable flicker.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Jan 2008
- Posts
- 705
- Location
- UK
You're missing the point, it's not about money at all. Open standards are about partnerships. AMD is deliberately not getting into the business of designing scaler chips, there are plenty of companies doing that already and they would not welcome the competition. AMD will offer help in making their products FS compatible, and put the finished hardware through certification to make sure the FS capability works. But they won't tread on the toes of manufacturers who's cooperation they need to make FS a success.
You seem to think this is some kind of failure on AMD's part, but it isn't. All open standards work this way at the beginning - you put up with some initial issues as the various manufacturers work out kinks, and in return eventually get a much wider adoption than proprietary systems. Every standard I can think of had these early issues - USB, DVI, DDR, etc. Didn't stop any of those going on to become very successful.
A costly, single-source proprietary system like GSync will gain the initial advantage, but what success it will have long-term is questionable. History suggests the answer would be not much. I'd be very, very surprised if two years from now FS compatible models on the market don't outnumber GSync ones by at least 10:1, completely vindicating AMD's approach.
Doesn't matter how many models they have available if they still have 20% discrete GPU market share
Everyone I read on the forums goes around this the wrong way.
At some point in the future, every NON GSync specific monitor will be freesync compatible. Just because the scalers all will have the VRR capability and there won't be ones without it.
This will create incentive for consumers to buy the appropriate graphics cards.
Don't look at the picture now, look at it once the VRR ecosystem is established.
Damn. I was looking forward to getting a nice 1440p 144hz IPS freesync screen. But £500 is a hell of a lot of money to drop on a screen (to me anyway) and I'm not sure I can do it with that freesync range... I'd wanna be sure the screen is going to keep me happy for a good 4 or 5 years for that money, and I'm not confident it will.
I've never actually used (x)sync so I just want a decent 1440p panel at that size with premium build quality and aesthetics that is ips and +60hz, freesync is just a bonus really ( assuming its actually a positive thing ). I think that having it cap out at 90hz is acceptable IF the monitor also supports a hard 90hz refresh lock option ( not sure if thats the case ). Upcoming VR headsets are also using 90hz as standard so it makes sense to me to use the monitor at that frequency.
I disagree. The difference in how things feel (how fluid) and the level of motion blur is significant comparing 90fps to 144fps. I certainly feel that 90fps can give a reasonable experience but I don't think it's prudent to underplay the difference those extra 54Hz and 54fps makes.
I have tested FreeSync and G-SYNC extensively at around 90Hz and compared it to 144Hz so I'm in a good position to draw the comparison.
Fair enough PCM2, just I have seen quite a few people on this and other forums (more so the gsync users) say that they find it hard to notice the difference between 60-90 FPS and 100+ FPS when gsync is active, I guess it will just be something that comes down to how sensitive the end user is to things like that.
edit:
Hearing your opinion on that has certainly made me think twice now though! I will never get more than 90 FPS with the latest games and max settings on my current rig but who knows how things will be in a year with new GPU's, dx 12/vulkan etc...
Perhaps ASUS should run a poll on various forums/sites and see what people would prefer?
I am hoping that another monitor manufacturer has a gsync 144hz ips screen coming soon though as I am 80% certain that I won't be sticking with amd for much longer.
edit:
Hearing your opinion on that has certainly made me think twice now though! I will never get more than 90 FPS with the latest games and max settings on my current rig but who knows how things will be in a year with new GPU's, dx 12/vulkan etc...
Perhaps ASUS should run a poll on various forums/sites and see what people would prefer?
I am hoping that another monitor manufacturer has a gsync 144hz ips screen coming soon though as I am 80% certain that I won't be sticking with amd for much longer.
Last edited: