• 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.

G-Sync is a con?

andybird123 said:
You do know that it is actually illegal for a company to not run itself for the benefit ofnthe shareholders, it is actually a legal requirement that a company tries to make a profit

If AMD gives stuff away for free it is because they didnt think they could profit from trying to charge for it
Click to expand...

Some people around here behave in a way that is very strange for people who claim to be ordinary Hardware enthusiasts with no vested interest in Nvidia.

Thats for a start ^^^^ but to then go further than that and state 'it's a legal requirement for Nvidia to milk it's user base and it's partners' is utterly bonkers.

Oh that makes it ok then.

I mean really? that just happened. astonishing. do i need to retune the set?
 
Last edited:
Hey bro, nice strawman.

Companies exist to make a profit. This should not be news.

Nvidia spent money doing R&D and released a product before anyone else did, shock horror they charged money and early adopters paid extra to get something without waiting.

You do know that people paying for things means money gets spent on R&D instead of where giving stuff away and failing to sell product means sacking large swathes of your workforce right?

I dont know how anyone can claim to be an enthusiast and then begrudge anyone who buys something just because it is marginally higher priced than something that might eventually be released.

No no, lets go on to internet forums and post derogatory nonsense at any company that makes a profit, because that isnt mental patient territory at all.
 
Last edited:
andybird123 said:
Hey bro, nice strawman.

Companies exist to make a profit. This should not be news.

Nvidia spent money doing R&D and released a product before anyone else did, shock horror they charged money and early adopters paid extra to get something without waiting.

You do know that people paying for things means money gets spent on R&D instead of where giving stuff away and failing to sell product means sacking large swathes of your workforce right?

I dont know how anyone can claim to be an enthusiast and then begrudge anyone who buys something just because it is marginally higher priced than something that might eventually be released.
Click to expand...

It always boils down to people spending more money on something meaning other are jealous.

The mistake that people like you always make is that you think a discussion about what a vendor is doing is an attack on you because you bought the product in question or because you are a fan of the company.

No, actually, it's not about what you buy, and just because someone call's into question something a company has done or the way in which it conducts it's self is not a reflect upon you, it's just a company, not your favourite grand mother.

It's not about you, no body cares what you do, Don't be so vain.
 
Last edited:
bru said:
One thing that does make me wonder just what is going on, is that if Adaptive Sync is the same as Gsync but without the module, then surely Nvidia can just take AMD/VESA to court for patent infringement, unless of course Nvidia didn't patent the crap out of their own technology. consequently I'm sure there are differences that we don't know about yet. Also surely AMD are not stupid enough to just copy Nvidia's technology so blatently unless there was enough difference that they could be taken to court over it.
Click to expand...

I don't know the ins and outs of it but it goes much further back than that - might have some of the details wrong as it is half remembered but IIRC EIZO had some 2048x2048 75Hz panels that did adaptive refresh rates ways back as it was a requirement for air traffic control the actual VESA "standard" or whatever behind it has existed for a while. (Trying to pull half remembered information together here).
 
Huumy dear, the entire thrust of your anti-gsync rant in this thread is that Nvidia have chosen to charge money for a product they developed and that anyone who buys that product is "being milked".

The funniest thing is that I dont even defend Nvidia for their business practices, they are a business, they do what businesses do and try to make money. Nothing they do reflects on me in any way. As soon as i point out a simple matter of fact you accuse me of thinking nvidia is my grand mother, what?
If someone came in here and started ranting at you like a madman because they caught you breathing, i would point out that people breathe.

You also accused me of not being an enthusiast because I pointed out to you that companies exist to make a profit. Your post was quoting and aimed at me, of course it was about me.

Apparently anyone who doesnt have a baseless rabid hatred of everything nvidia touches is in some way in love with them. Yeah ok. :D
 
Last edited:
andybird123 said:
Huumy dear, the entire thrust of your anti-gsync rant in this thread is that Nvidia have chosen to charge money for a product they developed and that anyone who buys that product is "being milked".

The funniest thing is that I dont even defend Nvidia for their business practices, they are a business, they do what businesses do and try to make money. Nothing they do reflects on me in any way. As soon as i point out a simple matter of fact you accuse me of thinking nvidia is my grand mother, what?

You also accused me of not being an enthusiast because I pointed out to you that companies exist to make a profit. You made it personal, not me.
Click to expand...

It's exactly my point, as soon as someone mentions Nvidia in a negative way you and several others lose their minds.

Disagree with me, don't try and make it about me or Nvidia's legal obligation to make a profit, WTF does that have to do with anything? Am i supposed to excuse them in the shady crap they pull in the name of their obligations.?
 
What shady crap? They built a desktop monitor controller that allowed variable refresh, they sold it to people. Over a year later and AMD have worked with some other companies to allow them to do the same, they are also going to be charging money for these new monitors.

That is what companies do, they make a thing and they sell a thing, what price people are willing to pay is down to the people doing the buying.

I havent lost my mind at all mate, your saying things that dont make any logical sense. You are literally having a go at nvidia for making a product and putting it up for sale. That is what all companies do, make things and try to sell them.
 
andybird123 said:
What shady crap? They built a desktop monitor controller that allowed variable refresh, they sold it to people. Over a year later and AMD have worked with some other companies to allow them to do the same, they are also going to be charging money for these new monitors.

That is what companies do, they make a thing and they sell a thing, what price people are willing to pay is down to the people doing the buying.

I havent lost my mind at all mate, your saying things that dont make any logical sense. You are literally having a go at nvidia for making a product and putting it up for sale. That is what all companies do, make things and try to sell them.
Click to expand...

Telling it's user base the 970 has 64 ROP's, 2MB L2 and 4GB of buffer for a start.

As i said much earlier in the thread, i think Nvidia could have gone down the same rout AMD have, but chose go it the way that cost their partners and us an unnecessary expense, an expense that ultimately end's in Nvidia's pocket.
 
This isnt that thread. I'm not defending Nvidia for publishing the wrong stats.

Yes, again, you are saying that you think nvidia should have developed a product and given it away for free instead of developing a product they can sell. It is bonkers to think that companies should develop products and not try to monetise them. Amd couldnt monetise adaptive sync because they dontnhave any gpu market share to make that work, nvidia do somthey leveraged that to get a new product on the market.

It is core basic economics.
 
humbug said:
Telling it's user base the 970 has 64 ROP's, 2MB L2 and 4GB of buffer for a start.

As i said much earlier in the thread, i think Nvidia could have gone down the same rout AMD have, but chose go it the way that cost their partners and us an unnecessary expense, an expense that ultimately end's in Nvidia's pocket.
Click to expand...

Not sure how the 970 has any impact on Gsync,,,
Yes you think Nvidia could have gone a different way and waited instead of getting a product out for a 6months?+ to its user base?
One could well say Nvidia could have not brought out gysnc at all and then there would also be no freesync . doesnt mean its true or how it should be done
Just because you happen to think one way doesnt mean thats how it should have gone or its milking just because its not how you would have done it.
Both sides imo milk but thats how they make a profit and keep making these GPU's we all like :)
 
andybird123 said:
This isnt that thread. I'm not defending Nvidia for publishing the wrong stats.

Yes, again, you are saying that you think nvidia should have developed a product and given it away for free instead of developing a product they can sell. It is bonkers to think that companies should develop products and not try to monetise them. Amd couldnt monetise adaptive sync because they dontnhave any gpu market share to make that work, nvidia do somthey leveraged that to get a new product on the market.

It is core basic economics.
Click to expand...

They should never have developed the G-Sync Module in the first place, there is a way without that cost. they way AMD are doing it.
 
If nVidia followed AMD's **** poor R&D, we would still be waiting for A-Sync and would not of had it available to us for well over a year. In tech terms, waiting this long for something is eons and allowing the competition to get this far ahead tells you what AMD think of their business/customers.
 
Gregster said:
If nVidia followed AMD's **** poor R&D, we would still be waiting for A-Sync and would not of had it available to us for well over a year. In tech terms, waiting this long for something is eons and allowing the competition to get this far ahead tells you what AMD think of their business/customers.
Click to expand...

You are trying to establish facts that you don't have, as usual, you know nothing about what you just cited as fact.
 
I really just wish one tech would win out now so that we can start to see monitors with support for variable refresh on any card.

I just can't personally justify it as I'd be semi-locking myself to a single vendor as I wouldn't want to lose the feature in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom