Poll: ** The AMD VEGA Thread **

[Rroff]

I'm not even going to have this discussion it will go nowhere.

 

[TheRealDeal]

So first Rroff says the GSync monitor has poor gaming characteristics as its IPS and the FreeSync one is VA.

Hence he is saying the FreeSync monitor is better for gaming due to the panel type.

Yet all the other threads where he and is mate have derided FreeSync based on maybe one monitor compared to another one,that is not twisted gibberish.

I think what a lot of this side by side testing has proven is when both tech's are working properly there is little between them. Then you have to ask is G-Sync with it's extra costs worth it and so far in all AMD's blind tests so far the answer is no.

I can honestly see Nvidia going to Adaptive Sync at some point as if these tests keep coming up with the same results people will start to turn on G-Sync due to the extra costs. With AMD due to bring in Freesync 2 improvements then you would think it will only hasten this unless Nvidia have something up there sleeve to improve G-Sync to a level above.

 

[andybird123]

There have been dozens of pages and pointless threads deriding FreeSync based on one or two monitors,from each,so basically you are saying those were less a comparison of FreeSync and GSync and more a comparison of different monitors??

So if you are now backtracking and saying the results are down to basically a poorly implemented GSync monitor for gaming and a better FreeSync monitor for gaming,wouldn't that hold true for some of the other comparisons??

oh come on, some people prefer IPS, some don't, the fact you can buy both IPS and VA panels on both gsync and freesync is neither here nor there... the fact that they could have used IPS for both is pretty telling as to what they were trying to achieve

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I think what a lot of this side by side testing has proven is when both tech's are working properly there is little between them. Then you have to ask is the G-Sync with it's extra costs worth it and so far in all AMD's blind tests so far the answer is no.

This - I have seen a few of them deride FreeSync as being poorer in the past,based on individual comparisons of a decent GSync monitor and a not so good FreeSync one. Also the fact that FreeSync is just lower quality,etc.

Now in this thread when it is apparently even GSync monitors can be rubbish for gaming - looks like implementation is the most important thing.

oh come on, some people prefer IPS, some don't, the fact you can buy both IPS and VA panels on both gsync and freesync is neither here nor there... the fact that they could have used IPS for both is pretty telling as to what they were trying to achieve

LOL,so what about when people were comparing that decent TN GSync monitor with one or two AMD VA/IPS ones,and then saying universally FreeSync is crap.

Now the moment it is shown that a FreeSync monitor can be actually be better than a GSync one,lets try and wriggle out of it.

I thought even in this thread FreeSync was meant to be rubbish and inferior?

Wait are you admitting a decent FreeSync monitor is better than a poor GSync one??

Edit!

Oh and another thing - I have zero vested interest in this. I have a GTX1080 and a UP2516.

But I find it funny how all of a sudden people are now changing their tune in the 'Sync WARS!

 

[Rroff]

Oh come on - many of these comparisons were things like the Acer Predator TN FS versus G-Sync, TN, etc. you are just twisting this to try and pointlessly score some imaginary points :|

 

[TNA]

Quite simply, at 4K the 1080ti would take a decent lead and people would then notice a difference.

AMD is using smoke and mirrors to hide the actual performance difference.

Bit silly if what you are saying is correct as reviews will show it's real performance?

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Oh come on - many of these comparisons were things like the Acer Predator TN FS versus G-Sync, TN, etc. you are just twisting this to try and pointlessly score some imaginary points :|

Your the one who is twisting stuff - now you are getting annoyed dude not me,like when posts you make even 5 minutes ago suddenly don't register like they are made of glass! It seems when FreeSync is crap when compared to GSync is deffo not the monitor but the base tech. But the moment FreeSync actual might win,its down to crap GSync monitor implementation,but even in this AMD thread(don't see it in any of the Nvidia ones funnily enough),there are people going on about the absolute superiority of GSync,OFC not visible to you since you can't even see your own posts. In fact sadly they are imaginary to you.

Edit!!

Also don't think I am actually routing for the RX Vega- I have made my viewpoints of it quite abundantly clear.

 

[andybird123]

LOL,so what about when people were comparing that decent TN GSync monitor with one or two AMD VA/IPS ones,and then saying universally FreeSync is crap.

Now the moment it is shown that a FreeSync monitor can be actually be better than a GSync one,lets try and wriggle out of it.

I'm not sure what planet you are on but that is not even remotely close to accurate. I take it you are referring to the toms hardware blind test that went in gsync's favour, that was IPS vs IPS. The problem in that test was that the freesync range was lower, but that was pretty universally true at the time.

They even mentioned in this hardocp review that they knobbled the IPS screen on IQ to try to hide the fact the AMD setup would have had a worse image.

You're not seriously suggesting that the choice of panel type and the settings used had no influence on the end experience.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I'm not sure what planet you are on but that is not even remotely close to accurate. I take it you are referring to the toms hardware blind test that went in gsync's favour, that was IPS vs IPS. The problem in that test was that the freesync range was lower, but that was pretty universally true at the time.

They even mentioned in this hardocp review that they knobbled the IPS screen on IQ to try to hide the fact the AMD setup would have had a worse image.

Its not the first or last time,people have latched onto individual comparisons to say which is better. There have been situations where reviews have shown FreeSync monitors to be perfectly fine but people still will try to push it back to one or two specific comparisons,to say its crap.

Also the other one - GSync monitors use better panels,Nvidia has more control,etc,people keep saying it in every AMD and Nvidia thread they can.

So going by those posts which mostly only two or three people here keep repeating you would get the impression that GSync is universally better whatever monitor you get.

Remember who shouts the most in even an AMD thread like this,that GSync is better??

Now apparently since the comparison in an AMD sponsored game(much more important than what 'Sync is better),goes AMD's way with no doubt a slower card,that really indicates a good FreeSync implementation can outdo a poor GSync implementation.

The fact why Rroff and others are getting annoyed in an AMD thread(of all things),is since they cannot universally say GSync is better,as they even have said the monitor needs to be looked at due to panel differences,so he needs to start insulting people to cover what he said.

So can we now put the whole FreeSync vs GSync,what is better to bed now?? Its more important to see the implementation at your price range,and go on from there??

 

[JediFragger]

Its more important to see the implementation at your price range,and go on from there??

That may be the way to go about it tbh.

 

[five8five]

The test should have used the same panel, Gsync or Freesync if applicable disabled.

Also it would have been interesting to find out what type of panel the testers use day to day.

 

[andybird123]

e fact why Rroff and others are getting annoyed in an AMD thread(of all things),is since they cannot universally say GSync is better,as they even have said the monitor needs to be looked at due to panel differences,so he needs to start insulting people to cover what he said.

So can we now put the whole FreeSync vs GSync,what is better to bed now?? Its more important to see the implementation at your price range,and go on from there??

No one is saying freesync is crap, people are pointing out that this wasnt an apples to apples test of freesync vs gsync so you cant make references to freesync being "better" from this test. Even the reviewer admits they stacked the test to remove the benefit of IPS. They are admitting they optimised the AMD system and then hobbled the nvidia one to make sure it didnt have any advantage. Which completely negates the entire "value" section of the interview.

You could do the same test with IPS gsync vs VA gsync and get the same results if you stacked the test in the same way.

Even AMD/the reviewer say that this was a test designed to show that vega + freesync is "no worse" than a 1080ti + gsync.

 

[FoxEye]

Oi, what's wrong with IPS now? My last two monitors have been IPS

Did try some VA screens, but the "black crush" killed it for me. Was a while since I last read up on it tho. Has VA now improved beyond IPS?

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

No one is saying freesync is crap, people are pointing out that this wasnt an apples to apples test of freesync vs gsync so you cant make references to freesync being "better" from this test. Even the reviewer admits they stacked the test to remove the benefit of IPS. They are admitting they optimised the AMD system and then hobbled the nvidia one to make sure it didnt have any advantage. Which completely negates the entire "value" section of the interview.

You could do the same test with IPS gsync vs VA gsync and get the same results if you stacked the test in the same way.

I am not saying FreeSync is crap or even better either,but I find it quite interesting looking through previous threads where one was declared absolute winner(maybe even this one,but would need to check),and now apparently its not so clear cut and we need to be weary of the implementation! I wish this had been agreed on earlier,might have made things less contentious!

Plus we all know this is an AMD card running an AMD sponsored game too,and in Vulkan AMD cards run this game reasonably well,so even if the monitors were EXACTLY the same panel type,its not telling us much.

Like I said it needs to at least match an aftermarket GTX1080,otherwise its market will be limited unless "cheap" especially if the power draw of the gaming card is anywhere comparable to the Vega FE.

 

[Rroff]

Has VA now improved beyond IPS?

Generally no - there are specific monitors using a boosted VA panel such as this one that behaves closer to AHVA panels (AHVA is not a VA technology). You still generally have the same problems with blacks though - crush and slow transitions in respect to them.

 

[stulid]

https://www.nordichardware.se/nyheter/radeon-rx-vega-prislapp-sverige.html

They reckon it's lots of krona

 

[melmac]

Thing is with VA - most pixel responses - especially with a panel like this one which is reasonably "boosted" are usually fast compared to IPS - where it falls down is some transitions especially from certain blacks which can be very very slow which can be annoying if you live with one every day but overall if you just sit down and quickly AB test the VA in this case will appear to have better clarity in motion:



Also you have SMTT 2.0 results of around 6ms for the FreeSync panel and over 9ms for the G-Sync panel which will be noticeable to varying degrees to some people.

Sorry, according to everything that I have read, VA is the worst of the three technologies for motion clarity. I am sure it's improving, but, IPS has improved too. If anything in a quick AB test people would notice an improvement moving from the VA to an IPS panel. And in a game like Doom, it would definitely be worse as there are lot of dark areas.

The 3ms difference is tiny, might not even exist, it could easily be caused by different equipment that each review site has access to. In reality what percentage of the population would be able to notice that small level of input lag anyway?

 

[Rroff]

Sorry, according to everything that I have read, VA is the worst of the three technologies for motion clarity. I am sure it's improving, but, IPS has improved too. If anything in a quick AB test people would notice an improvement moving from the VA to an IPS panel. And in a game like Doom, it would definitely be worse as there are lot of dark areas.

The 3ms difference is tiny, might not even exist, it could easily be caused by different equipment that each review site has access to. In reality what percentage of the population would be able to notice that small level of input lag anyway?

As above generally it is - some of these "gaming" VA panels though are a bit different to your run of the mill non-gaming VA monitor - still not ideal IMO but some might find the compromise better than IPS.

One thing which is a bit tricky though is that VA can have quite good responses for certain types of transitions which you typically encounter more often while having quite terrible transitions for some other transitions which pulls the average down but doesn't necessarily represent how people will perceive the difference in motion clarity.

EDIT: This puts it a lot clearer - from the Eizo review:

The overall gaming performance of the Eizo FG2421 was very good and we were pleased with what we saw. From a pixel response time point of view we were impressed by the fast transitions on the most part. True, there were a couple of dodgy transitions which were very slow (changes from black to dark shades) but most of the response time measurements were very good. They were certainly faster than we'd seen from other VA technology screens in the past. The average G2G response time was 8.4ms overall, but if we ignore those couple of very slow changes, it should have been more like 6.9ms. That puts it faster than the better IPS/PLS panels we have tested in fact. Add to this the fact the transitions were free of any overshoot problems at all and you have a great performance from the panel side of things. Sharp have done a very good job squeezing the best response times out of a VA matrix, while avoiding the need for an aggressive overdrive and resulting overshoot problems.

 

[Rezident]

All the talk of NVIDIA'S G-Sync tax, how many of you honestly believe that NVIDIA have any say In the price set for most of these monitors.

Well the nvdia proprietary g-sync module increases the price. That will certainly have a say in the cost and therefore the price of g-sync monitors over freesync monitors.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

https://www.nordichardware.se/nyheter/radeon-rx-vega-prislapp-sverige.html

They reckon it's lots of krona

I saw that too - I know AMD doesn't want to be looked as a bargain brand,but if they want to charge good prices the performance needs to be there though.

Its a bit like the Fury X,if they had sorted the QC issues with the cooler,and priced it £50 under the GTX980TI,it probably would have been looked at a bit more positively at launch.