• 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.

DisplayPort 1.2a Specification Change Request for Industry Standard Variable Refresh Rate

Its good news, 1.2a supports vBlank Timings, some screens already support vBlank and AMD already have it in their drivers, which is how they were able to demonstrate it at CES 2014.

I think what AMD are trying to achieve is vBlank added as a standard to DP 1.2a, so its a standard amongst all screens.

This 100%.

With this being adopted as a standard there will be no £160 premium for compatible monitors. All new monitors with DP will come with it as standard at no additional cost.

This is the point I was making earlier. New 4K monitors with DP 1.2a will have freesync capability built in. No need for an addition £160 premium. No way I would invest in a extortionately overpriced 1080p TN monitor when such massive advance in monitor tech are just around the corner.
 
This 100%.

With this being adopted as a standard there will be no £160 premium for compatible monitors. All new monitors with DP will come with it as standard at no additional cost.

This is the point I was making earlier. New 4K monitors with DP 1.2a will have freesync capability built in. No need for an addition £160 premium. No way I would invest in a extortionately overpriced 1080p TN monitor when such massive advance in monitor tech are just around the corner.

When and if that happens i will probably have to upgrade my monitor. It will have to be for a monitor of equal quality though. I'm not really that happy at the prospect of doing that as i've only had this monitor just over a year.
 
When and if that happens i will probably have to upgrade my monitor. It will have to be for a monitor of equal quality though. I'm not really that happy at the prospect of doing that as i've only had this monitor just over a year.

I've had a Dell U3011 for 3 years and it is an excellent monitor for those who don't just game. I no longer do freelance graphical work for sim developers so my next monitor will be a nice gaming 4K one. Now that this standard has been adopted it is a nice bonus to know when I do get around to upgrading my new monitor will be freesync capable.
 
It seems DisplayPort 1.2a has already been approved.

http://www.vesa.org/displayport-developer/faq/


Don't get mixed up here....it seems to me AMD are asking for a CHANGE to the already outstanding 1.2a spec, 1.2a in its current form doesn't include this vblank timing thingy freesync is dependant on.

Vesa need to firstly accept AMD's change of specification and then roll it out (if required).

As I said earlier, perhaps AMD should aim for it to be pushed into 1.3, its still a work in progress and any changes should be easier made.
 
Don't get mixed up here....it seems to me AMD are asking for a CHANGE to the already outstanding 1.2a spec, 1.2a in its current form doesn't include this vblank timing thingy freesync is dependant on.

Vesa need to firstly accept AMD's change of specification and then roll it out (if required).

As I said earlier, perhaps AMD should aim for it to be pushed into 1.3, its still a work in progress and any changes should be easier made.

Post #59 :)

Its good news, 1.2a supports vBlank Timings, some screens already support vBlank and AMD already have it in their drivers, which is how they were able to demonstrate it at CES 2014.

I think what AMD are trying to achieve is vBlank added as a standard to DP 1.2a, so its a standard amongst all screens.
 
Ahhh, done some googling, to be short with it....

It is supported as part of vesa 1.2a, but and this is a big but, no monitor manufacturer as of yet has implemented it, as they don't have to shove in every feature of the vesa standard.

It makes you think that surely there has to be a lot more to gsync then just this vblank stuff. The 6 and counting manufacturers on board with gsync must know about its implementation to 1.2a yet opted for nvodias own scaler...
 
Ahhh, done some googling, to be short with it....

It is supported as part of vesa 1.2a, but and this is a big but, no monitor manufacturer as of yet has implemented it, as they don't have to shove in every feature of the vesa standard.

It makes you think that surely there has to be a lot more to gsync then just this vblank stuff. The 6 and counting manufacturers on board with gsync must know about its implementation to 1.2a yet opted for nvodias own scaler...

Of course they did, they can charge extra as added value.
 
Wheres the extra value in cutting out half of the target audience?

I think there is FAR more to how both gsync and inevitably freesync work then anyone here realises.
 
I know nothing about this but it all sounds good to me. Free sync or GSync ,roll them both out and ill see which I want.

I have a question though in that will monitors that will support free sync be gsync moddable or are the 2 not compatible ? It would be huge if AMD get it as standard and that is so.

Again, sorry but I know nothing about it really just curious
 
Wheres the extra value in cutting out half of the target audience?

I think there is FAR more to how both gsync and inevitably freesync work then anyone here realises.

There isn't, its the same thing done in a different way.

They are not "cutting out half of the target audience" Nvidia advertise G-Sync as Nvidia exclusive, as far as customers are concerned they are paying extra for Nvidia features, hence "Value Added"

Its a falsehood, but then so is adding go faster stripes to cars and charging extra for that.
 
Eurogamer did a Gsync review.

There's a frame-rate threshold where the G-Sync effect begins to falter. It'll change from person to person, and from game to game, but across our testing, we found the sweet spot to be between 50-60fps in fast action games. Continual fluctuations beneath that were noticeable and while the overall presentation is preferable to v-sync, it still looked and felt not quite right. Owing to the nigh-on infinite combination of different PC components in any given unit, the onus will be on the user to gauge his quality settings effectively to hit the window, and equally importantly, the developer should aim for a consistent performance level across the game. It's no use tweaking your settings for optimal gameplay, only to find that the next level of the title incurs a much heavier GPU load. And if our G-Sync testing has taught us anything, it's that - within reason - consistent frame-rates are more important than the fastest possible rendering in any given situation.

Overall, G-Sync is a hardware triumph, but the quest for a consistent, enjoyable gameplay experience is far from over. By eliminating the video artefacts, G-Sync lays bare the underlying problems of wildly variable gameplay frame-rates in PC gaming and highlights the problems of inconsistent input latency. If the hardware issue is now fixed, what's required now are software solutions to make the most of this exceptional technology

Source
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-nvidia-g-sync-review


EDIT

Apologies for the OT, i should have posted this in the Gsync thread.
 
Last edited:
Wheres the extra value in cutting out half of the target audience?

I think there is FAR more to how both gsync and inevitably freesync work then anyone here realises.

Gsync is not cutting out anyone as the alternative is not ready yet, its adding a feature for more cost for those who have the pocket and the cards to run it.

freesync will not give them more profit so profit from gsync while they can.
 
That's what I'm getting at though, its being said the vblank thing is basically all gsync does, which exists as of dp 1.2a, if it already exists then why did they effectively cut out a portion of the target audience by going with the nvidia only method.

My overall point is gsync has to either be doing things freesync/vblank can't or it does a far better job, there is no other logical reason.

Surely profit would stem from extra sales to both parties.
 
I think pgi's point is that if this were as easy as is being made out and it was already part of a vesa standard, why didn't monitor manufacturers just ignore nvidia's module and just do freesync capable monitors off their own bat - it would cost them very little to update monitors to the latest vesa standard (so we are led to believe) and they could sell this new sync monitor to everyone, instead of just nvidia owners

People are saying that gsync wont sell or that freesync is easy, but it doesnt really stack up with monitor makers releasing gsync monitors, clearly they think otherwise

Edit: yeah what he said ^^
 
That's what I'm getting at though, its being said the vblank thing is basically all gsync does, which exists as of dp 1.2a, if it already exists then why did they effectively cut out a portion of the target audience by going with the nvidia only method.

My overall point is gsync has to either be doing things freesync/vblank can't or it does a far better job, there is no other logical reason.

Surely profit would stem from extra sales to both parties.

Your asking the same question again, it's already been answered. you just don't accept the answer, thats quite different from there being "no other logical reason"

Its just going round in circles when people give you a reason, answer your question, you then chose to respond to it by saying "no, there is no reason" as if the response to you somehow is invisible.
People aren't going to explain the same thing to you over and over and over again because you chose to ignore it.

There isn't, its the same thing done in a different way.

They are not "cutting out half of the target audience" Nvidia advertise G-Sync as Nvidia exclusive, as far as customers are concerned they are paying extra for Nvidia features, hence "Value Added"

Its a falsehood, but then so is adding go faster stripes to cars and charging extra for that.

Gsync is not cutting out anyone as the alternative is not ready yet, its adding a feature for more cost for those who have the pocket and the cards to run it.

freesync will not give them more profit so profit from gsync while they can.

Its more profitable for them to use something they can charge extra for. Thats not difficult to understand, if they go for something that everyone can use with no extra needs then there is no profit in it.
 
Last edited:
I think pgi's point is that if this were as easy as is being made out and it was already part of a vesa standard, why didn't monitor manufacturers just ignore nvidia's module and just do freesync capable monitors off their own bat - it would cost them very little to update monitors to the latest vesa standard (so we are led to believe) and they could sell this new sync monitor to everyone, instead of just nvidia owners

People are saying that gsync wont sell or that freesync is easy, but it doesnt really stack up with monitor makers releasing gsync monitors, clearly they think otherwise

Edit: yeah what he said ^^

The fact a couple of monitor manufactures have an exclusive with Nvidia means they can charge for the privilege. You only need to look at the pricing of identical monitors without G-sync is ~£160 cheaper. £160 extra for a monitor with a small PCB in it is early adopter premium rate.

You can get a GTX760 GPU for that price. Or a HD 270X plus change left over.
 
Your asking the same question again, it's already been answered. you just don't accept the answer, thats quite different from there being "no other logical reason"

Its just going round in circles when people give you a reason, answer your question, you then chose to respond to it by saying "no, there is no reason" as if the response to you somehow is invisible.
People aren't going to explain the same thing to you over and over and over again because you chose to ignore it.

Give over.
 
Your asking the same question again, it's already been answered. you just don't accept the answer, thats quite different from there being "no other logical reason"

Its just going round in circles when people give you a reason, answer your question, you then chose to respond to it by saying "no, there is no reason" as if the response to you somehow is invisible.
People aren't going to explain the same thing to you over and over and over again because you chose to ignore it.





Its more profitable for them to use something they can charge extra for. Thats not difficult to understand, if they go for something that everyone can use with no extra needs then there is no profit in it.

so why not release both?
surely they still make profit on "normal"/freesync monitors, so selling more monitors will be better than selling less

or what about the monitor makers that haven't signed up for gsync, surely there would be extra sales for them in selling freesync monitors?
 
Back
Top Bottom