** THE FIRST FREESYNC MONITOR ARRIVES AT OcUK!! **

Looks stunning, shame it isn't IPS though :( Will be excellent if we see these at £300 (B grade) with B grade and competitors getting the price down, annoying thing is I have had this 1440p monitor for the last 2 years and still see nothing wrong with it :(
 
shadow_boxer said:
Just shows how overpriced the G-Sync feature is.
Click to expand...

The closest BenQ match to this BenQ freesync monitor I can find on OcUK is £320. It's not 144hz but it is IPS, and doesn't have Freesync ofc. So a £180 difference in price and the difference is Freesync and 144hz. More like Premiumsync imo.

G-Sync at least has extra hardware and you can run it off any port, that's what you're paying for. So what about this £180 bump up in price for Freesync, what's that paying for? I thought the point of Freesync is that monitors were already capable of it in theory since the 90's, just no one bothered until a counter was needed for G-Sync, and to make it happen all that's needed is an updated display port? what is now DisplayPort 1.2a?. HDMI doesn't add £180 to a monitors value when it gets a revision.

Yes G-Sync is expensive, but Freesync looks like robbery despite being the cheaper option of the 2. I'm gutted for AMD users.
 
esoteric said:
The closest BenQ match to this BenQ freesync monitor I can find on OcUK is £320. It's not 144hz but it is IPS, and doesn't have Freesync ofc. So a £180 difference in price and the difference is Freesync and 144hz. More like Premiumsync imo.

G-Sync at least has extra hardware and you can run it off any port, that's what you're paying for. So what about this £180 bump up in price for Freesync, what's that paying for? I thought the point of Freesync is that monitors were already capable of it in theory since the 90's, just no one bothered until a counter was needed for G-Sync, and to make it happen all that's needed is an updated display port? what is now DisplayPort 1.2a?. HDMI doesn't add £180 to a monitors value when it gets a revision.

Yes G-Sync is expensive, but Freesync looks like robbery despite being the cheaper option of the 2. I'm gutted for AMD users.
Click to expand...

Frankly that's just rubbish, you've completely ignored the fact that the jump to 144Hz on a 1440p carries a massive premium. If you think this makes Freesync look terrible value then what do you think of the value of GSync on the ROG Swift?
 
esoteric said:
The closest BenQ match to this BenQ freesync monitor I can find on OcUK is £320. It's not 144hz but it is IPS, and doesn't have Freesync ofc. So a £180 difference in price and the difference is Freesync and 144hz. More like Premiumsync imo.

G-Sync at least has extra hardware and you can run it off any port, that's what you're paying for. So what about this £180 bump up in price for Freesync, what's that paying for? I thought the point of Freesync is that monitors were already capable of it in theory since the 90's, just no one bothered until a counter was needed for G-Sync, and to make it happen all that's needed is an updated display port? what is now DisplayPort 1.2a?. HDMI doesn't add £180 to a monitors value when it gets a revision.

Yes G-Sync is expensive, but Freesync looks like robbery despite being the cheaper option of the 2. I'm gutted for AMD users.
Click to expand...

I think that's one of the worst argued points I've ever read.

G-sync is worth the premium because it's got a little box on it, but Freesync which is £150 cheaper than the equivalent Gsync monitor is a complete rip off because it only works via DisplayPort?
 
nails666 said:
Frankly that's just rubbish, you've completely ignored the fact that the jump to 144Hz on a 1440p carries a massive premium. If you think this makes Freesync look terrible value then what do you think of the value of GSync on the ROG Swift?
Click to expand...

It's crap, I did say G-Sync is expensive. But it's justified for lack of better phrasing because of the extra hardware in the monitors. Adaptive Sync is an updated DisplayPort, a port type that is already common on monitors. No one has had to pay for this, DisplayPort is royalty free, so a £180 price rise is unjustified.

VincentHanna said:
I think that's one of the worst argued points I've ever read.

G-sync is worth the premium because it's got a little box on it, but Freesync which is £150 cheaper than the equivalent Gsync monitor is a complete rip off because it only works via DisplayPort?
Click to expand...

If that little box is not what makes G-Sync so expensive then tell me what does make it so expensive. I'm pretty sure it's that little box though. And no, it's not a rip off because it uses DP, it's a rip off because we are being asked to fork over £180 for free technology which has incurred no extra cost upon monitor manufacturers to implement.
 
Last edited:
esoteric said:
It's crap, I did say G-Sync is expensive. But it's justified for lack of better phrasing because of the extra hardware in the monitors. Adaptive Sync is an updated DisplayPort, a port type that is already common on monitors. No one has had to pay for this, DisplayPort is royalty free, so a £180 price rise is unjustified.



If that little box is not what makes G-Sync so expensive then tell me what does make it so expensive. I'm pretty sure it's that little box though. And no, it's not a rip off because it uses DP, it's a rip off because we are being asked to fork over £180 for free technology which has incurred no extra cost upon monitor manufacturers to implement.
Click to expand...

You still don't seem to understand that there is a large jump in price because you're comparing a 60Hz 1440p panel with a 144Hz 1440p panel regardless of any *sync tech involved.

Also as a side note both G-Sync and Freesync only work over DisplayPort connections but due to having to use the NVidia scaler G-Sync monitors only have a single DisplayPort connector while FreeSync monitors can have multiple other connection types as well.
 
VincentHanna said:
Yeah, old ones :)
Click to expand...

Precisely.
Nothing wrong with the old ones. There are some classic games that are considered old. I'd rather play a good game than a new game (if it's new and good then great, but there's not been a lot that's grabbed my interest recently).
Plus, AMD sometimes have Crossfire profiles for the really old ones.

Marine-RX179 said:
Wanting something like at in the present is pretty pointless, as graphic grunt won't be enough to push 100fps+ at 4K at decent settings till 2020 at least...
Click to expand...

I can run games at 60fps (VSync limited) at 4K on a single 290. I don't see why 3 290Xs or 980s could push 100fps+.

Besides isn't part of the benefit to Freesync that games can seem smoother at lower framerates? So even if you couldn't push 100fps in all games, those that could would be great and those that couldn't should still be good. Then when AMD release the 390X maybe we'll be able to push a few more to 100fps. Maybe I could keep the monitor longer than 1 or 2 generations of graphics cards?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom