FreeSync coming next month! (?)

[andybird123]

Wow, it's as optional as Gsync, if it's supported it works-if it transpires to do what it sets out to achieve.

Correct - and no one is actually having a go at freesync
Shanks and bumhug are trying to argue that freesync is better than gsync, when asked for examples of how and who freesync will benefit we are getting treated to a display of ever more niche examples

 

[Gerard]

I swear these threads are getting old fast, NVidia have gsync, amd have freesync, so far gsync seems to be good for NVidia owners, hopefully freesync is good for amd owners. Can we not just leave it at that instead of the pathetic point scoring about this or that supposedly being better?

 

[humbug]

Correct
Shanks and bumhug are trying to argue that freesync is better than gsync, when asked for examples of how and who freesync will benefit we are getting treated to a display of ever more niche examples

Oh now i see whats going on.

All i said was its a good idea to have it work at below 30 FPS, i didn't say anything about G-Sync.

 

[andybird123]

As you obviously missed it, i'll say again, nvidia say gsync is tuned on a per monitor basis, it supports whatever the lowest refresh rate the monitor does, so gsync can also work below 30

Are you caught up now?

This is from page 2&3 of the thread, pages you posted on, cant believe youve been involved in a discussion for the intervening 6 pages with no idea what was going on

 

[humbug]

As you obviously missed it, i'll say again, nvidia say gsync is tuned on a per monitor basis, it supports whatever the lowest refresh rate the monitor does, so gsync can also work below 30

Are you caught up now?

This is from page 2&3 of the thread, pages you posted on, cant believe youve been involved in a discussion for the intervening 6 pages with no idea what was going on

Why are you telling me this? and why so aggressive?

I was talking about Free-Sync in a Free-Sync thread.

All i said was i though it was a good idea that Free-Sync works below 30 FPS.

That was it, Nvidia did not come into it, i made no disagreements or comments of any kind in relation to Nvidia. This is not an Nvidia G-Sync thread.

 

[andybird123]

That was the conversation you joined mate, there was already a 30fps conversation going on, and you joined in with shanks on talking about why it is important to have freesync working below 30fps and shanks was saying "that makes freesync better"

There was no aggression implied or otherwise, i'm just surprised apparently you didnt read any of the other posts going on around you

 

[humbug]

That was the conversation you joined mate, there was already a 30fps conversation going on, and you joined in with shanks on talking about why it is important to have freesync working below 30fps and shanks was saying "that makes freesync better"

There was no aggression implied or otherwise, i'm just surprised apparently you didnt read any of the other posts going on around you

How?

Again, i said nothing about Nvidia, i did not say one was better than the other, i didn't even quote you or Shankley. i simply stated Free-Sync running at under 30 FPS was a good idea.

There is nothing in that which you should find offensive or in disagreement with you.

Or if so, what?

Whatever disagreement you have with Shankley is nothing to do with me, do not drag me into it.

 

[andybird123]

Lets ignore the fact that there was already an ongoing conversation about 30fps, Explain to me why you would even mention 30fps in a freesync thread?

 

[humbug]

Lets ignore the fact that there was already an ongoing conversation about 30fps, Explain to me why you would even mention 30fps in a freesync thread?

Because its a feature in Free-Sync and i think its a good idea.

What in that did you find me in disagreement with you?

 

[shankly1985]

Correct - and no one is actually having a go at freesync
Shanks and bumhug are trying to argue that freesync is better than gsync, when asked for examples of how and who freesync will benefit we are getting treated to a display of ever more niche examples

Hold on here, I was simply putting examples off how it "COULD BE BETTER" based on the information given to us.
I never once said it will be better big difference so stop trying to twist things. And nice personal attack at humbug.

 

[shankly1985]

Amd say it supports more refresh rate ranges and has lower over head. I was simply going from this information as to why it could be better. And giving examples.

 

[andybird123]

Because its a feature in Free-Sync and i think its a good idea.

What in that did you find me in disagreement with you?

From the freesync faq;
Potential ranges include 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz.

It doesnt mention 30fps, so why bring it up? Where did you get any reference to "30fps" from that it would warrant a mention?

Shanks; could, noted and thanks, no personal attack though, if you search for the term I think you are accusing me of, you'll find it is frequently used

 

[Kmodo]

And here's me thinking "wow this threads grown quite a bit, there must be some exciting news!"

 

[humbug]

From the freesync faq;
Potential ranges include 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz.

It doesnt mention 30fps, so why bring it up? Where did you get any reference to "30fps" from that it would warrant a mention?

Shanks; could, noted and thanks, no personal attack though, if you search for the term I think you are accusing me of, you'll find it is frequently used

This is what i said.

I think Free-Sync working at below 30 FPS is quite important, i very much doubt 9 FPS is anything like smooth even with Free-Sync, but 24< FPS is, i think its important to make it available across the full spectrum so those with entry level GPU's or APU's 'that can't always maintain 30+ FPS' still get the benefit of Free-Sync Smoothieness...

From your own FAQ quote.

21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz

 

[andybird123]

Yes, but where does the "30fps" come from, to what is it a reference?
Why 30fps and not 36fps (which would be an internal reference to freesync)?

I can only imagine that you are just being deliberately obtuse by this point

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

If either company wants mass market adoption of their variable sync tech they need to try and bring out sub £200 monitors with them.

 

[tommybhoy]

Wow, personal attacks and other comments are fine yet personal opinion on true availability of a tech is baiting?

Sort this out ocuk please.

 

[chaparral]

.... What a mess just thread is.....

 

[shankly1985]

Yes, but where does the "30fps" come from, to what is it a reference?
Why 30fps and not 36fps (which would be an internal reference to freesync)?

I can only imagine that you are just being deliberately obtuse by this point

I'll jump in, 30fps is used because that's the cut off point were a low end user is most likely to be playing games at.

Like I also said above, 30fps will be different on a Freesync monitor, less motion blur and less input lag still because the GPU is the one controlling when to display a frame.
30hz @30fps will be different to 60hz @30fps
You won't get the double frame, and blur and input lag.

Now this is how I see it and basing my own personal opinion on the spec sheet for Freesync.
Atm you won't know with Gsync because it's effective is loss the closer you get to 40hz either a limitation of Gsync or like you said the monitors we have.

So until you try Freesync with its lower refresh rate range, don't knock the fact it could help lower, Mid range users.

 

[andybird123]

Shanks, now you are saying WILL, not could
So that just goes back in circles with the convo from page 2

you are making absolute statements based on nothing

And that doesnt actually explain why humbug is referencing 30fps, your post from page 2 very clearly states what it is a reference to, but humbug is saying he randomly chose 30fps in a vacuum for no reason, which is clearly untrue