Upcoming FreeSync monitors

LG’s Curved 34-inch 21:9 Monitor with Extensive Screen

LG’s curved 34-inch UltraWide monitor (Model 34UC97) in Quad HD resolution (3440 x 1440) makes maximum use of screen real estate. It allows creative professionals such as graphic designers or photographers to look at more images as thumbnails and media creators to see longer video image sequences or graphical representations of sound. Mac users will find the monitor particularly appealing as it is compatible with Thunderbolt™ 2, capable of transfer speeds up to 20Gbps in a single logical channel. . The curved display further immerses users in their gaming experience.

Thanks to the 178-degree viewing angle of the In-Plane Switching (IPS) display which recreates colours across over 99 percent of the sRGBcolour space, there is no colour distortion at wide angles. The monitor’s colour accuracy, viewing angle and sRGBcolour space have been certified by TÜV Rheinland and Intertek and also validated by UL.


From http://www.lg.com/au/press-release/...-gaming-monitor-with-amd-freesync-at-ces-2015
 
its not very clear but it seems that one is not freesync
and only the 2560x1080 75Hz one is

atleast that's all that's been confirmed, unless someone can find out more :)
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7-jn07jy8I

Interview that Maximum PC conducted with AMD's Richard Huddy at CES.

He seems to think that the DP Adaptive Synch spec that they helped design (and therefore 'Freesynch') is inherently superior to G-Synch in performance as well as price and openess.

If true, I can't see G-Synch lasting into 2016.
 
pmc25 said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7-jn07jy8I

Interview that Maximum PC conducted with AMD's Richard Huddy at CES.

He seems to think that the DP Adaptive Synch spec that they helped design (and therefore 'Freesynch') is inherently superior to G-Synch in performance as well as price and openess.

If true, I can't see G-Synch lasting into 2016.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure Huddy's the epitome of objectivity.
 
It's hard to argue with his line of reasoning re: latency.

Anyway, I think they've already lost. By the end of Q2 this year, there will probably be 3-4x as many 'Freesynch' compatible monitors available as GSynch, despite NVIDIA having a headstart of over a year.
 
pmc25 said:
It's hard to argue with his line of reasoning re: latency.

Anyway, I think they've already lost. By the end of Q2 this year, there will probably be 3-4x as many 'Freesynch' compatible monitors available as GSynch, despite NVIDIA having a headstart of over a year.
Click to expand...

Time will tell but I always suspected this would be the case.

Part of an accepted standard
Cheaper to implement
Open standard

All of the above make it a better option going forward for consumers. If it does become more widespread expect Nvidia to support these monitors in some way.
 
I think they (nVidia) held the leash too tight. They wanted to limit the supply, keep the prices high and this way regain their R&D costs. And from a financial perspective, these are the things you indeed should do. In moderation. But now it seems they went overboard. They created hype, but the pricing (and available models) kept the customers from actually buying it. Now there's an alternative solution, which seems to achieve the same results. Can't say that the momentum was lost, they actually just never gained it, in the first place.

Then again, AMD can still mess up their own pricing, as well.
 
aatu said:
I think they (nVidia) held the leash too tight. They wanted to limit the supply, keep the prices high and this way regain their R&D costs. And from a financial perspective, these are the things you indeed should do. In moderation. But now it seems they went overboard. They created hype, but the pricing (and available models) kept the customers from actually buying it. Now there's an alternative solution, which seems to achieve the same results. Can't say that the momentum was lost, they actually just never gained it, in the first place.

Then again, AMD can still mess up their own pricing, as well.
Click to expand...

The pricing has nothing to do with AMD.
 
pmc25 said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7-jn07jy8I

Interview that Maximum PC conducted with AMD's Richard Huddy at CES.

He seems to think that the DP Adaptive Synch spec that they helped design (and therefore 'Freesynch') is inherently superior to G-Synch in performance as well as price and openess.

If true, I can't see G-Synch lasting into 2016.
Click to expand...

Huddy talks more trash than a politician.

I want both to be successful as it's better for us.

Gsync is amazing, it will last.
 
Martini1991 said:
The pricing has nothing to do with AMD.
Click to expand...

... What do you mean?

Ok, I'll first state how I've understood the current situation, so someone can correct me if I've misunderstood something:

1. Adaptive Sync is an optional VESA standard for DisplayPort
2. AMD was part of the group bringing it into existence
3. Adaptive Sync is a royalty-free standard
4. AMD has no say as to how it's priced
5. Freesync, OTOH, is AMD's proprietary implementation of the Adaptive Sync, and AMD holds all rights to Freesync
6. To implement Freesync in a monitor, the manufacturer would first have to make arrangements with AMD for it
7. If AMD wanted, they COULD initiate royalties or other costs to Freesync

Is it currently known WHO makes the hardware and/or software that's required for a compatibility with Freesync? If AMD has a part in it, then they can charge custom labor costs, material costs and/or royalty costs. For now, we have not been given such info?

Example:
nVidia could set the royalties for manufacturing G-Sync monitors as "free", but still control the scaler/IC manufacturing. And, instead of reasonable pricing, they could charge 10x the regular cost of the hardware implementation.

Furthermore, is Freesync limited to AMD's GPUs? If AMD wanted, they could alternatively recoup R&D costs by increasing the price of these said GPUs.

This is no doubt what nVidia is currently doing with their GPUs.
 
Freesync is AMD side (Like, exclusive to their GPU's, it's more of their medium to work with the adaptive sync to create a Gsync like effect (For a lack of a better term)) apart from the BOM attached to making the monitor DP 1.3 compliant with adaptive sync, there's no other price.

AMD has no say in how the monitors are priced (They may be able to make recommendation, but AMD hasn't got an actual say in what costs what)

Or at least that's how I've understood it. And the only reason why it's feasible for Nvidia to be able to use the adaptive sync standard (Obviously with their own method of using Sync)
 
Last edited:
Monitor manufacturers shouldn't need to state "Freesync compatible", but rather just note that it supports "Adaptive sync" or "Variable refresh rate support".

I wish the term "Freesync" could get dropped altogether. And AMD can just have a control panel option for "Adaptive sync". It's just confusing people.
 
eyetrip said:
Monitor manufacturers shouldn't need to state "Freesync compatible", but rather just note that it supports "Adaptive sync" or "Variable refresh rate support".

I wish the term "Freesync" could get dropped altogether. And AMD can just have a control panel option for "Adaptive sync". It's just confusing people.
Click to expand...

But they will as joe public won't put 2 and 2 together.
 
aatu said:
5. Freesync, OTOH, is AMD's proprietary implementation of the Adaptive Sync, and AMD holds all rights to Freesync.
Click to expand...

Freesync isn't an implementation of adaptive sync. It's just what AMD are calling their method to connect to an adaptive sync monitor.

aatu said:
6. To implement Freesync in a monitor, the manufacturer would first have to make arrangements with AMD for it
Click to expand...

Nope, it has nothing to do with AMD. They can decide if they want to make the monitor adaptive sync or not themselves.

aatu said:
7. If AMD wanted, they COULD initiate royalties or other costs to Freesync
Click to expand...

No, VESA is the body that governs the Display port standard, they decide if a royalty has to be paid of not to use a display port in your device. Adaptive sync is an optional part of the display port specification. AMD is just one member of VESA, Nvidia is also a member but there are over 200 companies that are members of VESA and they each get a vote. It would be up to all them to decide if a royalty has to be paid or not.

aatu said:
Is it currently known WHO makes the hardware and/or software that's required for a compatibility with Freesync? If AMD has a part in it, then they can charge custom labor costs, material costs and/or royalty costs. For now, we have not been given such info?

Example:
nVidia could set the royalties for manufacturing G-Sync monitors as "free", but still control the scaler/IC manufacturing. And, instead of reasonable pricing, they could charge 10x the regular cost of the hardware implementation.

Furthermore, is Freesync limited to AMD's GPUs? If AMD wanted, they could alternatively recoup R&D costs by increasing the price of these said GPUs.
Click to expand...

It is known who makes the hardware, AMD don't make or have any hand in the manufacturer of any part of a monitor.

Nvidia don't manufacturer monitors either. They just make the GSync unit that monitor manufacturers purchase from them to put into their monitors. And Nvidia doesn't make the hardware that they use in this unit. They buy the chip from Altera.

Freesync, the bit that's on the AMD card, is limited to AMD GPUs and APUs. But any graphic card maker can install the needed hardware controller to connect to an adaptive sync monitor. Intel, for example, have integrated GPUs for sale that only need a driver update to connect to an adaptive sync monitor.

It's just like if you need to connect to a HDMI monitor, your graphics card has to have a HDMI port.
 
@melmac:

I had multiple notions with the points you provided. But all of them focus on the same inconsistency: you're suggesting that Freesync == Adaptive Sync. But every source I found single-mindedly positions the Adaptive sync as the standard, and Freesync as an implementation of this very standard.

Even your own statement:
"Freesync isn't an implementation of adaptive sync. It's just what AMD are calling their method to connect to an adaptive sync monitor."

Doesn't the latter part practically translate that Freesync is indeed AMD's implementation of the Adaptive Sync standard?

Considering the overwhelming bias to contradict your statement, I will need to ask for sources for your claim.

Here are few examples of mine:
http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/freesync-faq.aspx
http://www.sweclockers.com/artikel/...ngsfrekvenser-med-project-freesync/2#pagehead
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...adaptive-sync-gets-added-to-displayport-spec/
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-project-freesync-vesa-adaptive-sync,27160.html

Here's a quote, straight from AMD's FAQ:
"DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync is an ingredient DisplayPort feature that enables real-time adjustment of monitor refresh rates required by technologies like Project FreeSync. Project FreeSync is a unique AMD hardware/software solution that utilizes DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync protocols to enable user-facing benefits: smooth, tearing-free and low-latency gameplay and video."

Also from the interview with Robert Hallock, Technical Communications Officer at AMD:

"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."

I think the emphasized parts make the situation quite clear.
 
aatu said:
@melmac:

I had multiple notions with the points you provided. But all of them focus on the same inconsistency: you're suggesting that Freesync == Adaptive Sync. But every source I found single-mindedly positions the Adaptive sync as the standard, and Freesync as an implementation of this very standard.

Even your own statement:
"Freesync isn't an implementation of adaptive sync. It's just what AMD are calling their method to connect to an adaptive sync monitor."

Doesn't the latter part practically translate that Freesync is indeed AMD's implementation of the Adaptive Sync standard?

Considering the overwhelming bias to contradict your statement, I will need to ask for sources for your claim.

Here are few examples of mine:
http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/freesync-faq.aspx
http://www.sweclockers.com/artikel/...ngsfrekvenser-med-project-freesync/2#pagehead
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...adaptive-sync-gets-added-to-displayport-spec/
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-project-freesync-vesa-adaptive-sync,27160.html

Here's a quote, straight from AMD's FAQ:
"DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync is an ingredient DisplayPort feature that enables real-time adjustment of monitor refresh rates required by technologies like Project FreeSync. Project FreeSync is a unique AMD hardware/software solution that utilizes DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync protocols to enable user-facing benefits: smooth, tearing-free and low-latency gameplay and video."

Also from the interview with Robert Hallock, Technical Communications Officer at AMD:

"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."

I think the emphasized parts make the situation quite clear.
Click to expand...

You are reading a lot but not understanding what you are reading and are arriving at the wrong conclusions. But that's based on websites using Freesync and adaptive sync interchangeably, so I can understand your confusion.

First of all Adaptive sync is what is in the monitor, people are wrongly referring to this as Freesync and this is what's causing all the confusion.

Adaptive sync is part of the display port standard. This has nothing to do with AMD. The VESA organisation is responsible for display port. They approve the specification.

http://www.vesa.org/news/vesa-adds-adaptive-sync-to-popular-displayport-video-standard/

Intel could connect to an adaptive sync monitor, just like AMD, but they might call their method of connecting, Isync or something like that. They don't need Freesync to connect because connecting to an adaptive sync monitor is completely open. If you could make a graphic card yourself you could do it, all you need is a hardware controller that allows asynchronous updating, appropriate drivers/software for that controller and a 1.2 display port.

It would make more sense if AMD called their method of connection something different like AMDSYNC, and let freesync and adaptive sync refer to the monitor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom