Nvidia to support Freesync?

[nashathedog]

Its not $10 or $20 he's just detracting from the real reason, the G-Sync Module is $150, add another $500 ontop of that if you want HDR. its well documented.

Your exact words were "Those who bought into G-sync thinking they are forever locked into nVidia no longer are." If you bought into G-sync you bought a G-sync monitor so unless you sell that one on you'll still be stuck only able to use Nvidia with the G-sync monitor tech.

It's not important, I was only making sure I hadn't missed additional info as that would have been a WTF! are Nvidia doing moment.

Yes you missed it. Maybe I worded it wrong. Basically if you buy/own one of these monitors that do both G-Sync/Freesync (this is how they will be branded after all) then you won’t feel stuck with one or the other.

I think you did With both you & Humbug effectively saying the same thing I thought either myself or someone at Nvidia must be going crazy.

 

[TNA]

I think you did With both you & Humbug effectively saying the same thing I thought either myself or someone at Nvidia must be going crazy.

Haha

 

[nashathedog]

Have they given up on their own proprietary GSYNC and gone with the free, open-source one permanently?

It seems their plan is to move G-sync into it's own ultra high end slot, ie: latest panel tech and massive screen sizes.

 

[nashathedog]

Hahahaha!

Can't help but feel smug with my brand new 32" AOC Freesync monitor and 1070Ti, with everyone and their aunt telling people (and me) to go for Vega GPUs because of Freesync support

Why do you feel smug about it? Vega's the better choice at the moment, We can already see Pascals new game performance dropping off just as we did with Maxwell, On AMD's side they're so slow with replacing hardware that Vega will probably still be the driver teams priority a year from now.

 

[TNA]

It seems they're plan is move G-sync into it's own ultra high end slot, ie: latest panel tech and massive screen sizes.

Makes a lot of business sense. I think they made the right move and I am happy to see it. I said this is what they should do a few years ago, but I think they were being clever to wait and do it now when there is so much negativity around the web with Turing.

2020 is going to be a good year to upgrade for me. I may end up doing a full PC upgrade around that time. Though I may get some of it started by getting a new Ryzen CPU, Mobo and RAM this year

 

[Rroff]

A big well well done to all of us who didn't cave and buy an overpriced display with propriotry tech Nvidia's market position is the only thing that allowed this to continue for years. Win for the consumer.

On the other hand if people hadn't bought - we probably wouldn't have any kind of adaptive sync tech - certainly wasn't any hurry from anyone else to support it.

 

[Sargatanas2511]

Does this not prove that the fabled (and obscenely expensive) G-Sync module was just a ripoff all along?

 

[humbug]

It seems they're plan is move G-sync into it's own ultra high end slot, ie: latest panel tech and massive screen sizes.

How do they get around the very expensive niche production runs vendors will have to do to make them?

Its two separate production lines, if they are running a G-Sync production line for 1% of your annual sales that screen will be extremely expensive, the economics of scale just don't add up, you're not going to run a production line for a rare product with in niche because you don't have the economy of scale to pay for your staff and low volume components.
Even nVidia will not have the economy of scale making those G-Sync Modules, if your not buying tens of thousands on components per order those components become very expensive, its unsustainable, its the other reason i think the G-Sync module is dead.

 

[nashathedog]

Several posts about whether GSync monitors are superior to Freesync monitors, or whether they are the same and GSync is now dead... I obviously don't know how this will play out, but there are definitely bigger differences that just the adaptive frame rate range... check out the reviews of the 34GK950G vs 34GK950F. They both have the same panel, but one has the GSync module... pros and cons, as the GSync has much lower lag than the FreeSync version, but you are more limited on max frame rate and colour gamut range on the GSync.

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/lg_34gk950g.htm
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/lg_34gk950f.htm

I don't think you can generalise to the point of asking "Are G-sync monitors better than Freesync monitors?", If we did the answer would have to be "Yes, G-sync monitors are better than Freesync monitors", That's because G-sync monitors are controlled by a module & they have a set of conditions on the chip that control how Gsync works and basically it works in the same way with every single monitor, in comparison Freesync use the adaptive sync open standard & monitor makers have free reign over how well they choose to support it on a model by model basis.

 

[Rroff]

Does this not prove that the fabled (and obscenely expensive) G-Sync module was just a ripoff all along?

Nope - having the module in most cases results in less processing latency, better low framerate management and better ability to handle non-exclusive fullscreen and various techniques to boost motion clarity (which does have rather mixed results) which aren't really possible or more limited without having the extra display buffers on the monitor.

 

[humbug]

I don't think you can generalise to the point of asking "Are G-sync monitors better than Freesync monitors?", If we did the answer would have to be "Yes, G-sync monitors are better than Freesync monitors", That's because G-sync monitors are controlled by a module & they have a set of conditions on the chip that control how Gsync works and basically it works in the same way with every single monitor, in comparison Freesync use the adaptive sync open standard & monitor makers have free reign over how well they choose to support it on a model by model basis.

Thats a very good point, the G-Sync Module is setup by nVidia to a very strict set of perimeters, the nature of Free-Sync is that its upto the vendors to set those perimeters.

That, actually, yes

 

[Sargatanas2511]

Nope - having the module in most cases results in less processing latency, better low framerate management and better ability to handle non-exclusive fullscreen and various techniques to boost motion clarity (which does have rather mixed results) which aren't really possible or more limited without having the extra display buffers on the monitor.

They are certifying monitors that don't have it with the same stamp as the ones that have the module. Being that they have *only* 12 monitors that fit their high standards it shows they are comfortable they don't need that module to deserve the label.

 

[Nasher]

Does this mean there will be no discernible difference between an actual gsync monitor and a gsync compatible one? The one with the gsync module will still perform better right?

There already isn't much of a difference, some older freesync monitors could only go down to about 48hz and that was about the only drawback. Visually there is no difference at all. I own both. Gsync isn't worth the money.

If the rumor is true and Nvidia want to bump up the price even more and make it "high end" tech. They will sell even less and it will still die eventually. It's probably about time they replaced their CEO tbh. Get someone who understands what gamers want (and can afford)

 

[humbug]

There are some free-sync screens that are not good, usually at the lower end, some of them are very good, usually at the higher end.

You pay for what you get, but at least you can get Free-Sync on screens as little as £99, if you want better ones you pay more, if you can't get a high end one, well you still get to have adaptive sync tech.

I think it also creates competition between vendors, especially once nVidia are fully on board, and Intel, everyone on the same adaptive sync tech.... how it should be.

 

[nashathedog]

Makes a lot of business sense. I think they made the right move and I am happy to see it. I said this is what they should do a few years ago, but I think they were being clever to wait and do it now when there is so much negativity around the web with Turing.

2020 is going to be a good year to upgrade for me. I may end up doing a full PC upgrade around that time. Though I may get some of it started by getting a new Ryzen CPU, Mobo and RAM this year

Wasn't it you earlier who mentioned they'd been keeping support for adaptive sync in the bank for a rainy day? To be honest I was real surprised to see that they'd used it now, That said I suppose Turing's been a right mess, what with the high pricing response, ray-tracing performance woes and card failures affecting confidence and stock prices, maybe it was the right time. I might actually move to a 2070 later in the year to have a play around with rt & dlss on my freesync monitor.

 

[Rroff]

They are certifying monitors that don't have it with the same stamp as the ones that have the module. Being that they have *only* 12 monitors that fit their high standards it shows they are comfortable they don't need that module to deserve the label.

I think you are reading too much into the certification - those 12 monitors will not provide the same levels of performance even G-Sync certified compared to the same monitor with a G-Sync module - having extra display buffers on the monitor is required for feature support or to get that low level of latency, etc.

 

[nashathedog]

There are some free-sync screens that are not good, usually at the lower end, some of them are very good, usually at the higher end.

You pay for what you get, but at least you can get Free-Sync on screens as little as £99, if you want better ones you pay more, if you can't get a high end one, well you still get to have adaptive sync tech.

I think it also creates competition between vendors, especially once nVidia are fully on board, and Intel, everyone on the same adaptive sync tech.... how it should be.

Knowing that my 75hz 3440x1440 Ultrawide Freesync monitor has a decent 30 to 75 hz working range with LFC support means that now Nvidia offer adaptive sync support I'll now have access to try everything* without losing anything, It's great news for consumers like us.

*ray-tracing, DLSS & whatever AMD and Intel bring to the table to match it over the next couple of years, With one monitor we'll be able to try it all.

 

[Sargatanas2511]

I think you are reading too much into the certification - those 12 monitors will not provide the same levels of performance even G-Sync certified compared to the same monitor with a G-Sync module - having extra display buffers on the monitor is required for feature support or to get that low level of latency, etc.

They seem happy enough to band them all together without people knowing the difference so I would say they expect it to be very very similar or the same.

 

[Stu]

There are some free-sync screens that are not good, usually at the lower end, some of them are very good, usually at the higher end.

You pay for what you get, but at least you can get Free-Sync on screens as little as £99, if you want better ones you pay more, if you can't get a high end one, well you still get to have adaptive sync tech.

I think it also creates competition between vendors, especially once nVidia are fully on board, and Intel, everyone on the same adaptive sync tech.... how it should be.

Do we expect £99 Freesync monitors to work well with GSync active at driver level? I'm guessing not...

 

[Stu]

They seem happy enough to band them all together without people knowing the difference so I would say they expect it to be very very similar or the same.

From my understanding, they are not banding them together... Freesync monitors that perform to a level that Nvidia are happy with will be labelled as 'G-SYNC Compatible', and monitors with a GSync module will be labelled as "G-SYNC".