G-Sync is a con?

[Tute]

it gets a bit like that yes

Got an actual LOL from me.

 

[melmac]

Are you for real, I asked a question with regards to AMD's Free sync. Some people in this forum need a reality check.

Woah!! sorry, my post that you quoted is missing a "" this line "are you getting angry because I said something bad about Nvidia? " It was just me joking around because of the bizarre statements earlier in the thread. ie hating for no reason. Anyway, it sounded better in my head

 

[melmac]

25th November, over a month after gsync was announced and demoed... bear in mind that it was demoed feature complete on the 18th October, there is clear evidence that it was researched, developed and productised in to an actual monitor in plenty of time for a public event. Kudos to AMD for coming up with a laptop eDP to desktop idea in a month and a demo within 3, but gsync was clearly developed before adaptive sync.

http://www.hardware.fr/news/13545/amd-freesync-proposition-dp-1-2a.html

In their first press release AMD stated that the hardware to support adaptive refresh rates has existed since the 6*** series, but i find it hard to believe theyve been working on it for that long.

If adaptive sync had been in the works with Vesa prior to gsync then i'm sure AMD would not have been backwards about coming forwards to tell everyone, but they havent.

Thanks for the link. Does that mean both NVidia and AMD arrived at the variable sync refresh rates for desktop monitors independently from each either. Maybe the arrival of Gsync hurried the whole adaptive sync bus along

Because AMD were definitely preparing for this during the production of the 290/260 cards. It's a question I asked during the Q&A here on this forum. Maybe Thracks lied, but why?

This isn't an AMD or Nvidia thing, It really doesn't matter to me who thought of what first, just trying to put it all together for my own interest.

 

[andybird123]

I can't answer that, sorry. Nvidia have been quite open to the public on what the gsync module does and how, but technical details on how AMD are handling freesync on their gpu's is scant. The only thing we know for sure is that Nvidia were able to get this in to reviewers hands before any Vesa/AMD documentation that has been released existed. And AMD are being pretty quiet on when they actually say they started working on it.

In January 2014 they said that they would be supporting 6*** series, by the end of 2014 this changed to 7*** series for movies and 2**series for gaming. That doesnt strike me as something that was confirmed to be working on during launching the 290, though that launched around November 2013, so even if they started working on it after the gsync reveal, that would still technically be starting to work on it during the 290 launch, so he hasnt really lied, just been a bit cute with his answer.

 

[queamin]

And AMD are being pretty quiet on when they actually say they started working on it.

Yes they would be, when ever have you known AMD say anything about up coming gpu's and to be honest if the hardware is in the 290 then they been thinking about it for years ever since they designed the 290 to put the hardware part in place, when ever that was maybe around 2010/11 because you know gpus takes years to design and get put on the shelve for us to buy.

 

[queamin]

But I don't think G-Sync is a con as it works and people are happy with it, the hack I would think isn't reliable yet anyway from what I have seen but haven't been keeping up with it as it doesn't concern me really.

The main point is if the buyers are happy then there should be no problem.

 

[MOOGLEYS]

One thing I have learnt about G-Sync since enabling it on my laptop is I could not play a game without it now. It's such a game changer I did not expect tbh.

 

[andybird123]

Yes they would be, when ever have you known AMD say anything about up coming gpu's and to be honest if the hardware is in the 290 then they been thinking about it for years ever since they designed the 290 to put the hardware part in place, when ever that was maybe around 2010/11 because you know gpus takes years to design and get put on the shelve for us to buy.

In January 2014 AMD said that the 6*** series had the requisite hardware.
Does that mean Amd started working on this in 2007?

If so, why has it taken them 8 years to get a product out?
Or If this is hardware specific to the 290, why didnt they announce it along side true audio and mantle?

It literally makes no sense that they had this baked in to the 290 specifically but never announced it until after nvidia did theirs.

 

[queamin]

The point is that it is in the 290 which was designed years ago, they had it put in for a reason but what that was I couldn't tell you as I never designed the 290.

 

[bru]

Yes they would be, when ever have you known AMD say anything about up coming gpu's and to be honest if the hardware is in the 290 then they been thinking about it for years ever since they designed the 290 to put the hardware part in place, when ever that was maybe around 2010/11 because you know gpus takes years to design and get put on the shelve for us to buy.

In January 2014 AMD said that the 6*** series had the requisite hardware.
Does that mean Amd started working on this in 2007?

If so, why has it taken them 8 years to get a product out?
Or If this is hardware specific to the 290, why didnt they announce it along side true audio and mantle?

It literally makes no sense that they had this baked in to the 290 specifically but never announced it until after nvidia did theirs.

I would expect that the technology was in the cards but they didn't know they could use it for that purpose. I reckon that Nvidia shook things up with the Gsync announcement, and it was only then that AMD realised that the tech in their cards could do a similar function. This in my opinion is backed up by that very first demo of freesync, it looked very rushed using laptop screens. If they had been working on it for ages, with a planned launch then surely they would have sorted out some proper monitors.

 

[andybird123]

The point is that it is in the 290 which was designed years ago, they had it put in for a reason but what that was I couldn't tell you as I never designed the 290.

Well, one thing they did announce when they launched the 290 was extra frame pacing hardware... which nvidia introduced with the gtx680... that would be my bet as to what they added to the 290 that also makes adaptive sync possible but not on earlier hardware...

Just because the adaptive sync is only supported by the 290 onwards doesnt automagically mean theyve been working on adaptive sync since they started designing the 290

As bru says, from the hastily thrown together demo they did it is pretty obvious it was a knee jerk reaction

 

[melmac]

I would expect that the technology was in the cards but they didn't know they could use it for that purpose. I reckon that Nvidia shook things up with the Gsync announcement, and it was only then that AMD realised that the tech in their cards could do a similar function. This in my opinion is backed up by that very first demo of freesync, it looked very rushed using laptop screens. If they had been working on it for ages, with a planned launch then surely they would have sorted out some proper monitors.

Well, one thing they did announce when they launched the 290 was extra frame pacing hardware... which nvidia introduced with the gtx680... that would be my bet as to what they added to the 290 that also makes adaptive sync possible but not on earlier hardware...

Just because the adaptive sync is only supported by the 290 onwards doesnt automagically mean theyve been working on adaptive sync since they started designing the 290

As bru says, from the hastily thrown together demo they did it is pretty obvious it was a knee jerk reaction

I think you are both wrong, and I agree with Queamin, though I have no real proof. Anyway here are my thoughts.

What make no sense is why AMD would put hardware into their latest desktop GPUs that fits the requirements of a display port specification that didn't even exist at the time. A technology that has no use on desktop GPUs without a compatible monitor.

It's nothing to do with XDMA as that isn't on the R7 260 cards.

I can't offer any real explanation as to the 6*** cards supporting freesync. A marketing error? Incorrect information at the time? Or maybe the 6*** series cards can support freesync the same way the 7*** cards can, but just AMD decided it was too much trouble to write drivers to support cards that old, especially since the people most likely to buy an adaptive sync monitor are gamers and they would need the latest GPU anyway. So they decided not to support them.

The Knee Jerk reaction can be explained by what you and Bru said, but it might also be because Nvidia caught them by surprise with the release of Gsync, that they didn't realise Nvidia had any plans for a variable refresh rate monitor.

And we all know how slow AMD move, isn't pretty amazing that they submitted a proposal to VESA and got working demo of Freesync in the space of 2 months? Does this suggest that, maybe, AMD were already working on freesync?

And Thracks himself stated it was in development alongside the updated display controllers of the 290/260 cards.

I am sorry, but I find it extremely difficult to believe that AMD started thinking about freesync after the release of Gsync.

 

[Rroff]

I can't offer any real explanation as to the 6*** cards supporting freesync. A marketing error? Incorrect information at the time? Or maybe the 6*** series cards can support freesync the same way the 7*** cards can, but just AMD decided it was too much trouble to write drivers to support cards that old, especially since the people most likely to buy an adaptive sync monitor are gamers and they would need the latest GPU anyway. So they decided not to support them.

Early PR had Mantle supported on a generation earlier than it actually came to be so probably same kind of thing happened with FreeSync. No doubt PR people running with things they don't understand the tech side of.

 

[andybird123]

Early PR had Mantle supported on a generation earlier than it actually came to be so probably same kind of thing happened with FreeSync. No doubt PR people running with things they don't understand the tech side of.

It was Raja Koduri that said it, chief technical officer.
Most likely they just decided not to support older cards to get people to upgrade.

 

[Silent_Scone]

I am sorry, but I find it extremely difficult to believe that AMD started thinking about freesync after the release of Gsync.

AMD had just released Hawaii not weeks before G-Sync was announced.

Do you mean to tell me that dynamic refresh rate support isn't a selling point?

They knew the technology was in EDP, I would go as far as to say it may have been on the cards at some point in the future.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

If its done in a laptop,then is because they use a display interface and is why FreeSync was shown off in a laptop first. On desktop you need a compatible scaler to do so with the display interfaces desktop PCs use.

 

[melmac]

AMD had just released Hawaii not weeks before G-Sync was announced.

Do you mean to tell me that dynamic refresh rate support isn't a selling point?

They knew the technology was in EDP, I would go as far as to say it may have been on the cards at some point in the future.

You are wrong too, because the r7 260x was released before Gsync and it has support for adaptive sync. Not that I think that AMD would have had time to change their cards to support adaptive sync between the Gsync demo and the launch of the 290x. Was it even a week between the demo and 290x launch?

Why would dynamic refresh rates be a selling point if there was nothing there to connect to? AMD would have looked pretty stupid if they advertised this feature on their cards and it didn't pan out with VESA and monitor manufacturers. The reaction from people was bad enough when AMD did the demo, that it as never going to happen, vapourware, where were the monitors etc etc. Imagine how much worse it would have been if they advertised it as a feature on their cards with nothing in place at all!!

Gsync definitely hurried the whole thing up. Have never argued against that at all. I would say Gsync helped more than anything to get monitor manufacturers interested in variable refresh rates.

IF you can give me another explanation why AMD put hardware into their cards to support a specification that didn't exist at the time, I will gladly listen to it. But, until you do I will take Thracks word on this over yours.

 

[queamin]

AMD had just released Hawaii not weeks before G-Sync was announced.

Do you mean to tell me that dynamic refresh rate support isn't a selling point?

They knew the technology was in EDP, I would go as far as to say it may have been on the cards at some point in the future.

Since when does a video card takes weeks to design from the start and get put on our shelves, here I thought it took years.

 

[Silent_Scone]

Since when does a video card takes weeks to design from the start and get put on our shelves, here I thought it took years.

Who said anything about designing? I'm talking about the announcements in and around the press events.


Words fail me. at least ones that don't describe just how daft that comment is.

Why would dynamic refresh rates be a selling point if there was nothing there to connect to?

I don't know maybe you should ask AMD the same question. They seemed to think it current when showing EDP...

 

[melmac]

Who said anything about designing? I'm talking about the announcements in and around the press events.


Words fail me. at least ones that don't describe just how daft that comment is.

We have been, that's what we have been discussing. You are using that the fact that AMD released Hawaii after the Gsync demo and not before as proof that AMD hadn't been thinking of freesync until then.

We are saying that's BS because no way could they change the design of their cards in that short of time, and anyway the Bonaire card was out before any Gsync announcement.

I don't know maybe you should ask AMD the same question. They seemed to think it current when showing EDP...

I agree with the first part of your statement, You don't know. What has displaying eDP got to do with advertising dynamic refresh rates on their desktop gpus?