Proprietary vs open standard nearly 4 years on

[opethdisciple]

The main take away is it's crap you are tied to a vendor(regardless who's to blame) but both can run AS panels if you want to.



Nope, AMD do a higher max fps range than G-Sync panels, and your mates G-Sync's far from Ronseal when it's throwing up artifacts due to a panel/G-Sync bug.

That's an Acer issue tho. Not necessarily Gsync or Nvidia.

But then not all panels do it. We've already established that with FreeSync it's hard to work out what the synch range is for the panel in question.

 

[opethdisciple]

Agree 100%. Had this monitor nearly 3 years now, has been great value at 450 quid and has extended the life of this 1070.

If it makes 3 years, which it should, it'll have been 150 quid a year, 12 and a half quid a month.

I only bought mine last year. The alternative would have been an Acer Predator. But with how my mates Predator turned out (vertical line issue - manufacturing fault with those monitors) I choose well.

 

[AthlonXP1800]

Ok firstly I will apologise for starting what will probably be quite a controversial thread.

Over the last couple of months I have noticed a increasing number of people make comments like

Now we all know that GSync is proprietary to NVidia and Freesync is based on the open standard Adaptive-Sync.

In fact both G-Sync and Freesync do the same thing and both are based on open standard VESA Adaptive-Sync but added VBLANK hardware and software support to G-Sync and Freesync while VESA Adaptive-Sync did not have VBLANK support. G-Sync is proprietary to Nvidia and Freesync is proprietary to AMD. However some people believed Freesync is not proprietary and Freesync is same as VESA Adaptive Sync but it is not.

AMD's Robert Hallock explained 4 years ago:

Could you please explain the difference between AMD FreeSync and VESA Adaptive-Sync?

– VESA DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync is a new component of the DisplayPort 1.2a specification that allows a graphics card to control the refresh rate of a display over a DisplayPort link. As it seems there is some confusion, I want to emphasize that DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync is not FreeSync. By itself, DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync is a building block that provides a standard framework a source device, e.g. a graphics card, can depend on to execute dynamic refresh rates.

DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync is an important development in our industry, however, because there now exists an industry-standard framework that dynamic refresh rate technologies, like Project FreeSync, can rely on to deliver end-user benefits: no tearing, minimal input latency, smooth framerates, etc. Make no mistake, providing dynamic refresh rates to users still takes a lot of ‘secret sauce’ from the hardware and software ends of our products, including the correct display controllers in the hardware and the right algorithms in AMD Catalyst.

https://www.sweclockers.com/artikel...m-dynamiska-frekvenser-med-project-freesync/2

 

[AthlonXP1800]

G-Sync screen: Nvidia card.

Freesync screen: AMD card, Nvidia card (with workaround), Xbox, Playstation, Intel card (next year).

Looks pretty good to me, the argument can be made that Intel's support is on paper only at this point and that the Nvidia workaround requires effort, but even if it hasn't liberated gaming "yet" then it will next year for sure.

There are some incorrect about Freesync screen support. PlayStation 4 and 4 Pro do not worked with Freesync, PlayStation 5 will not support Freesync as PlayStation 5 will have hardware V-Sync and VRR based on Sony proprietary technology just like G-Sync and Freesync. Intel card in 2020 will use VESA Adaptive Sync but may work with Freesync with workaround just like Nvidia. It will interesting to see how Intel will get it work with VESA Adaptive Sync without use VBLANK maybe with driver tricks.

Last month Rivatuner RTSS 7.2.0 added cool new feature S-Sync (Scanline Sync) that is game changer for everybody like me who do not own Freesync and G-Sync monitors.

S-Sync is amazing worked on my HDTV, had no screen tearing with V-Sync off in games. Ran fully automatically.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/9wb5d5/rtss_720_new_ssync_scanline_sync_is_a_game/

Good video, but sadly sweary in the video thumbnail :/

4 years on nobody cared about Freesync and G-Sync when you can use S-Sync.

 

[Rroff]

S-Sync is basically a combination of FastSync and adaptive V-Sync and you still get tearing if the framerate is dropping. It is still an inferior solution to G-Sync/FreeSync and if you have a very fast GPU it is inferior to FastSync in some respects.

It is a gamer changer for those who'd otherwise be stuck on monitors juggling the compromises of V-Sync on/off especially at 60Hz but still not as complete a solution as an adaptive sync monitor and hardware.

 

[bru]

There are some incorrect about Freesync screen support. PlayStation 4 and 4 Pro do not worked with Freesync, PlayStation 5 will not support Freesync as PlayStation 5 will have hardware V-Sync and VRR based on Sony proprietary technology just like G-Sync and Freesync. Intel card in 2020 will use VESA Adaptive Sync but may work with Freesync with workaround just like Nvidia. It will interesting to see how Intel will get it work with VESA Adaptive Sync without use VBLANK maybe with driver tricks.

Last month Rivatuner RTSS 7.2.0 added cool new feature S-Sync (Scanline Sync) that is game changer for everybody like me who do not own Freesync and G-Sync monitors.

S-Sync is amazing worked on my HDTV, had no screen tearing with V-Sync off in games. Ran fully automatically.



4 years on nobody cared about Freesync and G-Sync when you can use S-Sync.

Change the video thumbnail as it has swearing in the subtitles.

 

[ubersonic]

Change the video thumbnail as it has swearing in the subtitles.

Doesn't that mean he's not allowed to link to it anyway?

 

[tommybhoy]

That's an Acer issue tho. Not necessarily Gsync or Nvidia.

But then not all panels do it.

It's not an Acer issue it's a panel+G-Sync bug, if your mate turns off G-Sync he'll not get the pixel shift.

NV either tried to fix it in a driver a few revisions ago(don't know which one but it's in the notes) or they're aware of the issue, one or the other but it was in the driver notes.

Not to say FreeSync doesn't have the odd issue too I'd imagine in case anyone reads this as a G-Sync critisism, but nothing on pc is Ronseal-it just works.

I think you are concentrating on ranges and not concentrating on the fact FreeSync has a bigger footprint on adoption that caters for the free in FreeSync with poor ranges all the way up and past the current max FPS range on G-Sync on proper but still sometimes hugely cheaper FreeSync gaming panels.

 

[melmac]

It wasn't a personal attack.

I was just put off Freesync over Gsync because with Gsync you know exactly what your getting whichever Gsync panel you buy.

With FreeSync a lot more homework needs to be done. As not all Freesync panels are the same.

It needs to be standardised. I know this was the idea behind FreeSync 2.

lol, what? Why would I have considered it a personal attack??

I am just saying that no matter which monitor you buy a lot of homework has to be done. You spent a long time asking questions about Gsync before buying your monitor. Not all Gsync panels are the same either, there are 60hz ones and there are 100Hz ones. And if you are spending a lot of money on a monitor that's going to last you a few years you are going to read reviews, ask questions on forums etc. Finding the freesync range takes a couple of minutes and most of them it matches the refresh rate these days.

The Freesync 2 standard is more to do with HDR and Latency than the range. Making sure that the monitors with the Freesync 2 badge meet the HDR and Latency criteria specified by the standard. Yes, there is LFC but that already exists for current freesync monitors. If you want a monitor with a freesync range that goes up to 144Hz, you are still going to have to check the monitor's specs.

 

[melmac]

I believe Freesync 2 is supposed to move in the direction of Gsync, so a Freesync 2 screen will have to meet certain criteria and be certified by AMD. In doing so the price differences between the 2 systems will likely reduce significantly because only the more premium Freesync screen would meet the Freesync 2 sync range and quality criteria.

Freesync monitors will coexist with Freesync 2 monitors. Freesync 2 monitors will all be HDR and have reduced latency. You are forgetting that Gsync 2 monitors are out that have HDR and these are more expensive than ordinary Gsync monitors. So that price gap won't close at all. In fact, there are Freesync 2 monitors out already and they are £500 cheaper than their nearest Gsync 2 equivalent.

 

[melmac]

However some people believed Freesync is not proprietary and Freesync is same as VESA Adaptive Sync but it is not.

Freesync is the combination of hardware and software(drivers) on AMD cards that allow them to connect to adaptive sync monitors. It's just that since launch the Freesync name has become synonymous with Adaptive Sync. Adaptive sync monitors have become Freesync monitors.

Because Freesync and adaptive sync have come to mean the same thing in many people's minds, when they say Freesync is an open standard they are really talking about the Adaptive Sync standard. But people like yourself keep been stupidly pedantic about the whole thing claiming that Freesync isn't open.

 

[nashathedog]

That's what you get with any Gsync Panel. Cheapest all the way up to the most expensive.

That's been the biggest problem for AMD, Big monitor makers like LG took advantage of there being no conditions attatched to using Freesync as a selling point when it first came to market, At first it was impossible for consumers (I know this because I tried many times) to get info on the working range of many Freesync capable monitors, At the time I wanted to upgrade to either a 2560x1440 or a 2560x1080 Freesync monitor, but because I couldn't find any info on the working range of most models I held off from buying one, AMD knew there was a problem and it's why they created a new section on their website where we can get all the tech specs on a monitor's Freesync support & it's why Freesync 2 is in the works (if it still is), LG are one of the biggest monitor makers & they were the biggest Freesync offender, branding monitors as Freesync Gaming monitors even though some had working ranges that were as low as only 12hz wide (48-60) as a worst case. LFC (low framerate compensator) wasn't a feature when the first freesync monitors released but now it's probably the most important feature you want to make sure is included when looking to buy a Freesync monitor as it copies (roughly) how G-sync deals with low framerates, it also needs a fairly wide working range to work.

But then not all panels do it. We've already established that with FreeSync it's hard to work out what the synch range is for the panel in question.

It's not hard, As I posted earlier AMD's website holds all the relevant data regardless of model or brand. It's been available for a couple of years now and it is updated with new model specs all the time.

https://www.amd.com/en/products/freesync-monitors

 

[nashathedog]

I believe Freesync 2 is supposed to move in the direction of Gsync, so a Freesync 2 screen will have to meet certain criteria and be certified by AMD. In doing so the price differences between the 2 systems will likely reduce significantly because only the more premium Freesync screen would meet the Freesync 2 sync range and quality criteria.

AMD lost the plot with the Freesync 2 requirements, It's probably why there's no Freesync 2 models around yet (not that I've seen).
Freesync & Gsync are about matching hz to frames to remove tearing etc, but some numbnut at AMD thought making HDR a Freesync2 requirement was a good idea, It wasn't as it has nothing to do with what Freesync & Gsync are about.

 

[henson0115]

In fact both G-Sync and Freesync do the same thing and both are based on open standard VESA Adaptive-Sync but added VBLANK hardware and software support to G-Sync and Freesync while VESA Adaptive-Sync did not have VBLANK support. G-Sync is proprietary to Nvidia and Freesync is proprietary to AMD. However some people believed Freesync is not proprietary and Freesync is same as VESA Adaptive Sync but it is not.

AMD's Robert Hallock explained 4 years ago:



https://www.sweclockers.com/artikel...m-dynamiska-frekvenser-med-project-freesync/2

https://www.amd.com/Documents/FreeSync-Whitepaper.pdf
not according to he whitepaper
"For many years, the display industry has operated with the understanding that displays run at a fixed refresh rate (eg. 60 Hz). This is in contrast with the fact that there are many types of content that can be sent to a display, each with its own unique, and sometimes varying, frame rate. When the display refresh rate is not synchronized to the content frame rate, the user can experience undesirable effects such as tearing and stutter. For mobile applications, unnecessarily high display refresh rates for static and video content can increase power draw and reduce battery life. These factors have given rise to the need for a technology that allows the refresh rate of the display to adapt to the frame rate of the content, in a way that appears seamless to the end user. AMD has developed Project FreeSync, that uses a VESA industry standard (known as “Adaptive-Sync) to enable variable refresh rate capabilities over DisplayPort and Embedded DisplayPort interfaces"

also for reference
http://www.vesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/VESA-Adaptive-Sync-Whitepaper-140620.pdf

 

[melmac]

AMD lost the plot with the Freesync 2 requirements, It's probably why there's no Freesync 2 models around yet (not that I've seen).
Freesync & Gsync are about matching hz to frames to remove tearing etc, but some numbnut at AMD thought making HDR a Freesync2 requirement was a good idea, It wasn't as it has nothing to do with what Freesync & Gsync are about.

There are Freesync 2 monitors out and as I said to D.P. Freesync and Freesync 2 will coexist. IF you are looking for a HDR monitor, you simply buy a Freesync 2 one. If you don't need HDR you just buy a normal Freesync one. Freesync 2 just guarantees that the HDR will be of a certain standard.

 

[Blackjack Davy]

I'm happy with it. But I did upgrade from a 10 year old monitor. Which was awful!

How do you get on with your monitor?

HP OMEN 32 2560x1440 75Hz Freesync

Is your synch range up to 75Hz? Or from 75Hz?

The point is my monitor (infact any Gysync panel) will give you 30 - max fps no questions asked.

Thats down to the monitor surely? The freesync panel I had did 30-75, the max limit on the monitor (no overclock function on the XR34)

 

[nashathedog]

There are Freesync 2 monitors out and as I said to D.P. Freesync and Freesync 2 will coexist. IF you are looking for a HDR monitor, you simply buy a Freesync 2 one. If you don't need HDR you just buy a normal Freesync one. Freesync 2 just guarantees that the HDR will be of a certain standard.

I haven't seen any F2 models yet, that said I haven't really been looking so I'll have to go & take a look. However, you've kind of made my point for me by focusing on Freesync 2's HDR support, HDR should never of been a condition of Freesync 2 as it has nothing to do with the adaptive sync tech, All it's done is cater for a very small percentage of the market, As you said both Freesync & Freesync 2 will co exist meaning that for another few years the majority of monitors will continue to be Freesync ones instead of Freesync 2's & there'll still be no conditions attached to using the Freesync moniker. They needed to keep F2 simple so it could differentiate the good from the bad across the range not just provide monitor makers with an excuse to start making the price gap between high end Freesync 2 monitors & Gsync monitors shrink. F2 should have only been about the working range & the LFC support.

 

[melmac]

I haven't seen any F2 models yet, that said I haven't really been looking so I'll have to go & take a look. However, you've kind of made my point for me by focusing on Freesync 2's HDR support, HDR should never of been a condition of Freesync 2 as it has nothing to do with the adaptive sync tech, All it's done is cater for a very small percentage of the market, As you said both Freesync & Freesync 2 will co exist meaning that for another few years the majority of monitors will continue to be Freesync ones instead of Freesync 2's & there'll still be no conditions attached to using the Freesync moniker. They needed to keep F2 simple so it could differentiate the good from the bad across the range not just provide monitor makers with an excuse to start making the price gap between high end Freesync 2 monitors & Gsync monitors shrink. F2 should have only been about the working range & the LFC support.

The models are from Samsung, the ChG versions. Freesync 2 is the premium version of Freesync offering HDR, lower latencies and LFC. Just the same as Gsync 2 is Gsync with HDR. Freesync 2 is about offering more features to the customer who are looking for more. If you are looking for a HDR monitor and you have an AMD card you buy a Freesync 2 monitor and you are guaranteed a certain level of HDR, a monitor that works with LFC and lower latency.

If you don't need a HDR monitor, you buy an ordinary Freesync one and check the range before you buy. Because even if you buy a Freesync 2 monitor or a Gsync monitor you are still going to check the refresh rates and the other specifications. You aren't going to go and buy a monitor based on just having the Freesync 2 sticker. They still have to offer various resolutions and refresh rates at different price points because they are limited by the panel used. Unless of course you want every Freesync 2 monitor to cost over a £1000.

 

[nashathedog]

The models are from Samsung, the ChG versions. Freesync 2 is the premium version of Freesync offering HDR, lower latencies and LFC. Just the same as Gsync 2 is Gsync with HDR. Freesync 2 is about offering more features to the customer who are looking for more. If you are looking for a HDR monitor and you have an AMD card you buy a Freesync 2 monitor and you are guaranteed a certain level of HDR, a monitor that works with LFC and lower latency.

If you don't need a HDR monitor, you buy an ordinary Freesync one and check the range before you buy. Because even if you buy a Freesync 2 monitor or a Gsync monitor you are still going to check the refresh rates and the other specifications. You aren't going to go and buy a monitor based on just having the Freesync 2 sticker. They still have to offer various resolutions and refresh rates at different price points because they are limited by the panel used. Unless of course you want every Freesync 2 monitor to cost over a £1000.

I get what you're saying, The way I look at it is that the focus was meant to be about ensuring a better Freesync experience with a baseline level of support to ensure Freesync 2 worked as well as G-sync, Adding HDR was about including the latest & greatest tech, The next best thing, a buzzword, G-sync with HDR isn't about offering an improved G-sync experience, it simply adds HDR so it's not really comparable (or at least it shouldn't of been). All G-sync monitors have the same level of support within the monitors hz range. Being open standard Freesync doesn't ensure that & that should have been the goal of Freesync 2, They could have added a HDR version if needed or they could have done a Freesync+ but instead they leave Freesync with the same pitfalls.

 

[henson0115]

I get what you're saying, The way I look at it is that the focus was meant to be about ensuring a better Freesync experience with a baseline level of support to ensure Freesync 2 worked as well as G-sync, Adding HDR was about including the latest & greatest tech, The next best thing, a buzzword, G-sync with HDR isn't about offering an improved G-sync experience, it simply adds HDR so it's not really comparable (or at least it shouldn't of been). All G-sync monitors have the same level of support within the monitors hz range. Being open standard Freesync doesn't ensure that & that should have been the goal of Freesync 2, They could have added a HDR version if needed or they could have done a Freesync+ but instead they leave Freesync with the same pitfalls.

it was a goal of freesync 2 and to my knowledge they have achieved a range of a min of 48-144hz i havnt seen a single panel with a smaller range like freesync 1. also "The end result is LFC effectively removes the minimum refresh rate of adaptive sync displays, but for LFC to be supported, the monitor needs to have a maximum refresh rate that is at least double the minimum refresh rate. This is why not all FreeSync monitors support LFC; some come with just 48 to 75 Hz refresh windows, which doesn’t meet the criteria for LFC. However in the case of FreeSync 2, every monitor validated for this spec will support LFC so you won’t have to worry about the minimum refresh rate of the monitor."
so freesync 2 supporting lfc means that all monitors must have a bigger range.
melmac is off on the range part slightly.