1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Poll, nVidia CEO on Free Sync, is he believable or not?

Discussion in 'Graphics Cards' started by humbug, Jan 11, 2019.

?

Do you believe Jensen Huang

  1. I believe Jensen Huang

    21 vote(s)
    10.9%
  2. I do not believe Jensen Huang

    118 vote(s)
    61.5%
  3. Pancakes

    53 vote(s)
    27.6%
  1. tommybhoy

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 30, 2010

    Posts: 11,432

    Location: Under The Stairs!

    Clearly not as by doing battle with G-Sync, because AMD didn't enforce restrictions/pay walling FreeSync their end-the war is all but over, FreeSync won.

    I think most don't realise why AIB's brought out lesser ranged FreeSync panels than their G-Sync panels, when the tech settled, it was choice driven by profit not restriction most gaming monitors are produced by aib's that provide both tech.

    Can imagine watching a tense movie scene or bricking yourself scared to walk down a sewer tunnel with visual/sound/lighting cues in full flow viewed in pitch dark on a huge home cinema setup waiting for a pin to drop that will never drop because there's a hoover Ronsealed to the wall drowning out the atmosphere...

    There is different BM's to claim quality, none of the two of them hit an absolute imo, I'm pretty sure there are thousands of vrr users basking in quality provided by FreeSync because it wasn't available on Nv pp, but a standardised feature set doesn't equate to a quality set by Gsync when a a quality can only be set by an affordable option over no option.

    G-Sync had some benefits, FreeSync had other benefits, both had their faults, one is thriving, the other is going mission dodo.
     
  2. BubbySoup

    Mobster

    Joined: Nov 22, 2003

    Posts: 2,611

    Location: Cardiff

    G-Sync isn't without its limits and issues, it's far from what I would call a premium solution.

    Ironically the most expensive G-Sync module is the most laughable.
     
  3. humbug

    Caporegime

    Joined: Mar 17, 2012

    Posts: 28,208

    Exactly.

    +1
     
  4. EastCoastHandle

    Gangster

    Joined: Jun 8, 2018

    Posts: 265

    One can only face palm that there were those that truly believed that gsync would out do freesync. Free...
    Free...
    Free...

    Lets all think on that. Something that cost 2x more vs Free was going to depreciate and make EOL something being offered for free. Because its chips...because it's hardware...because it's used in more costly panels...the excuses go on and on and on.
    Sad
     
  5. Stanners

    Don

    Joined: Feb 20, 2006

    Posts: 3,822

    Location: Leeds

    Hold on, has G-Sync production ceased or are they just giving the option of adaptive sync also?
     
  6. ICDP

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Dec 30, 2011

    Posts: 2,257

    Location: Belfast

    VESA Adaptive Sync is open source and people claiming AMD should have been more stringent on what was allowed to use the Freesync name are ironically ignoring this is why it undeniably won the Adaptive Sync war.

    Had AMD stopped monitor manufacturers flooding the market with cheap Freesync monitors the technology would have had significantly reduced adaption rate. Cheap Freesync monitors have low adaptive sync ranges but they cost almost nothing extra to implement (higher spec DP port). Every single cheapo monitor out there with Freesync brought a tiny little bit more brand recognition. Top of the range Freesync monitors were as good as anything G-Sync offered. Lol if that wasn't true then Nvidia would never have "approved" them for the "coveted" G-Sync brand name.

    Let that sync (pun intended) for a while. Nvidia have lost the Adaptive Sync war and have had to make a total 180 u-turn to allow this "crap technology" work on their superior GPU with the G-Sync name. Yet we are to believe Nvidia when they say they have the consumers best interests in mind.

    Most rational consumers knew that a good Freesync monitor does exactly the same job as the best G-Syn has to offer, yet at a cheaper price.

    I suppose the moral is that even Nvidia's much vaunted marketing has it's limits before people see through the BS.
     
  7. TheRealDeal

    Sgarrista

    Joined: May 28, 2007

    Posts: 8,965

    +1

    I was going to post something very similar but you have summed up what i was going to say especially on flooding the market to get the Freesync/Adaptive Sync brand out there.

    No you will still have the option to buy the G-Sync monitors with the module along with certified G-Sync/Freesync monitors and other Freesync monitors that may work with Nvidia cards but won't carry the G-Sync name.
     
  8. melmac

    Soldato

    Joined: Dec 19, 2010

    Posts: 6,176

    Too easy, the game would be over so quickly. :p
     
  9. opethdisciple

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 18, 2010

    Posts: 17,391

    Location: London

    If this is the case then why have they sought to standardise it with FreeSync2? There was meant to be a certification program which meant the monitor is only certified as FreeSync2 if it meets certain criteria by AMD.

    Unfortunately rather than removing the ambiguity around Freesync it just added to it.
     
  10. TheRealDeal

    Sgarrista

    Joined: May 28, 2007

    Posts: 8,965

    :D:D:D:D:D
     
  11. drunkenmaster

    Caporegime

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 32,746

    Nvidia has always done this. With sli, and blacklisting boards in drivers so sli was disabled or drivers don't work unless a certification fee is paid. They are entitled to do that, they are entitled to charge people making boards to pay to enable a feature... it's crappy ethically and it prevents me buying Nvidia until they stop such practices.

    I'd even be okay if Jensen said simply without making excuses that we only allow the best and only those who pass certification will work and if they actually blacklisted other screens, instead he says you can enable it (though as it seems maybe they enable it such that it will flicker almost on purpose to prove their point) on other monitors but only these are good enough for 'g-sync' and then proclaiming freesync doesn't work is way beyond that. he's making a false statement about another companies product and being a **** about it. But yes, he's doing it to get that nice certification money.

    You don't have to charge money for certification, I believe PSU makers pay a nominal fee for the time spent testing their PSUs to get the gold/silver/plat ratings, a lot of other certifications are free, freesync is free, you send a panel to AMD and they'll test it and if it works within the range the manufacturer defines they'll certify it for that range.

    Nvidia SHOULD do it for free, or a nominal fee, but they've historically used their appeal to customers to charge an arm and a leg for such services while going out of their way to make sure motherboards/sli/whatever doesn't work properly (or at all) if such fees aren't paid.

    G-sync has always been able to work over adaptive sync, it will work on all monitors that support it. Some monitor makers make less good monitors, that's natural, and have less good ranges as a result. I won't buy them, but I won't buy a £90 1080p panel either freesync or not but to deny a potential benefit for a user of a cheaper screen with a limited range is asinine, and to claim freesync doesn't work because some manufacturers make less good screens is absurd.

    This is Jensen wanting the best features to carry the biggest premiums and for people to pay more rather than having tech filter down to low cost improvements as quickly as possible. He wants the guy who can only afford a £99 screen to not have a feature and to hope he pays more for it. Even though that feature is free and it costs nothing to support it, he wants that guy and everyone like him to have a worse experience because they should pay him more for a better experience. I can't stand him or his company's practices, same as Intel right now. Still using Intel because I'm waiting for Ryzen 3xxx then I'm switching. If AMD get enough marketshare to start acting like *****, then i'm screwed.
     
  12. tommybhoy

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 30, 2010

    Posts: 11,432

    Location: Under The Stairs!

    Because it's an optional certification-not an enforced requirement.
     
  13. ltron

    Hitman

    Joined: Aug 30, 2014

    Posts: 929

    I voted that I don't believe him but you can certainly find monitors with the Freesync branding that don't work well, that's because it's rather lax for my liking. There are many monitors that work brilliantly though so it's disingenuous to say Freesync as a whole doesn't work.

    I don't like the fact Nvidia will be profiting from this, AMD should have had separate tiers for Freesync so we could see at a glance which are good then Nvidia wouldn't have been able to do this.
     
  14. drunkenmaster

    Caporegime

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 32,746

    Should someone who can only afford a cheap screen be denied a free feature in freesync because the likes of Nvidia want to keep it to increase the prices of higher end monitors though? If it improves the experience for someone who can only afford a RX460 and a £100 screen, then if you don't think that screen is good enough who cares, chances are you think the £100 screen without freesync isn't good enough either, I certainly wouldn't get it with or without freesync.
     
  15. ltron

    Hitman

    Joined: Aug 30, 2014

    Posts: 929

    I agree with you that it's much better for the budget monitors to have some Freesync functionality than none at all, I just think the higher end monitors should have had a 'Freesync Ultimate' badge so that we knew that it had a decent range and good performance. I'm glad Freesync 2 HDR does that now, I just wish AMD mandated at least Vesa HDR600 certification because HDR400 is not true HDR.

    My point was that Nvidia shouldn't have had the opportunity to do what they are doing now as the 'Freesync Ultimate' certification would have precluded them from doing so.
     
  16. humbug

    Caporegime

    Joined: Mar 17, 2012

    Posts: 28,208

    They already do this, its called Free-Sync 2

    To get 'Free-Sync 2' certification minimum standards need to be met, they are:

    Minimum low latency DisplayHDR 400.
    Free-Sync 2 panels must have Low Frame Rate Compensation.

    Panels that don't meet those specifications are branded Free-Sync.
     
  17. gerardfraser

    Gangster

    Joined: Apr 27, 2014

    Posts: 265

    Well I got rid of my 165Hz G-sync and bought 4K IPS Freesync so I hope it is true and driver release in the next few hours can not wait to try it out.
     
  18. Gerard

    Caporegime

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 29,701

    Location: Ireland

    So 10 votes so far are drinking the koolaid, interesting. That implies some people are buying into Huang stating that freesync doesn't work at all. Well, reviews and end user experience say otherwise.
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2019 at 12:09 AM
  19. spoffle

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 4, 2012

    Posts: 15,990

    We've all got a good idea who's voted for that as well.
     
  20. D.P.

    Caporegime

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 28,971


    Not in the slightest. Some.people just aren't biased and can also trust 3rd parties


    [/QUOTE]

    Freesync seems to be all.over the place. AMD might well be able to fix a load of problems in drivers, but who knows what issues aren't resolved together nicks even coukd. And why should they.

    Gsync guarantees certain user experiences. Interesting uninterrupted the same stamp of approval they need to all offer the same experience. Ironically AMD have decided this is the rightway to go,with freesync2 basicly the same thing.


    It is not like nvidia block non-certified screen from working, the user just has to manually enable them.