• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Who will be getting a Vega card and why?

Depends on price/performance but if it’s better value than Nvidia (not hard these days!) I will get one big one, possibly a second small one for my backup/VR system.

I’m actually surprised how well my Fury is holding up at 1440p in games. Seems to be anti-aging every month but I just want a new toy anyway.

It’s for gaming.
 
Reality|Bites;30486894 said:
Greed from whom? Nvidia or the monitor manufacturers?

Surely they could still sell the cheaper freesync only monitors but still sell ones with both?
Click to expand...

The main costs are in the redesign of the monitor (they need to do this to create the space for the G-Sync module, the module itself and most likely a licensing fee to Nvidia. So i would say Nvidia as none of this would be necessary if Nvidia used adaptive sync. Without knowing what the costs are it's hard to say if the monitor manufacturers make more on top of a G-sync monitor compared to a Freesync.

A decent read on why G-Sync costs more. From that you can make your mind up.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3129...ia-g-sync-on-monitor-selection-and-price.html

Even if monitor makers proceed with the necessary research and development, the resulting product will be more expensive, which inevitably means it will sell in lower volumes. That, in turn, means it’s harder for monitor makers to recoup those up-front development costs, says Jeffry Pettinga, the sales director for monitor maker Iiyama.

“You might think, oh 10,000 sales, that’s a nice number. But maybe as a manufacturer you need 100,000 units to pay back the development costs,” Pettinga says.

Meanwhile, he says, monitors are constantly improving in other areas such as bezel size. As monitors shrink from wide bezels to slim bezels to edge-to-edge displays, the risk is that a slow-selling G-Sync will become outdated long before the investment pays off.

“Let’s say you introduced, last year, your product with G-Sync. Six months of development, and you have to change the panel. You haven’t paid off your development cost,” Pettinga says. “There’s a lot of things going on on the panel side.”
Click to expand...

In an interview, Tom Petersen, Nvidia’s director of technical marketing, doesn’t dispute any of these concerns, and acknowledges that the high cost to develop G-Sync monitors puts them into a pricier segment of the market.

But to Nvidia, that’s okay, because G-Sync is supposed to be a premium product. The company points to several ways in which G-Sync is superior to FreeSync, including its ability to handle any drop in refresh rate—FreeSync only works within a specified range—and Nvidia’s complete control over things like monitor color and motion blur, which Petersen argues are superior to what monitor makers are offering outside the module.

For those reasons, Petersen says any price disparity between comparable G-Sync and FreeSync monitors is not due to the module, whose cost he says is “relatively minor,” but due to monitor makers' decision to charge more.

“To me, when I look out and see G-Sync monitors priced higher, that’s more of an indication of value rather than cost,” he says. “Because at the end of the day, especially these monitors at the higher segments, the cost of the components don’t directly drive the price.”
Click to expand...
 
That explanation stinks of horse poo to me. If Nvidia were confident that G-Sync was the better solution and weren't making good money off the licensing fees (driving up the cost) then they would support adaptive sync too and let the consumer decide.

Its about lock-in. People replace their monitor less often that their GPU so if you can sell them a G-Sync screen you practically guarantee they you'll get their next GPU purchase too. Freesync is the same but at least there is some potential there for the segmentation to end if Nvidia decide to support it.
 
Baboonanza;30486978 said:
That explanation stinks of horse poo to me. If Nvidia were confident that G-Sync was the better solution and weren't making good money off the licensing fees then (driving up the cost) then they would support adaptive sync too and let the consumer decide.

Its about lock-in. People replace their monitor less often that their GPU so if you can sell them a G-Sync screen you practically guarantee they you'll get their next GPU purchase too. Freesync is the same but at least there is some potential there for the segmentation to end if Nvidia decide to support it.
Click to expand...

+1 It's what i and many others think but you can't fault there business strategy which seems to work. I really do think they will be forced to use Adaptive Sync as the choice of Freesync monitors is growing all the time. It will become the norm for just about all monitors to support it i would have thought.
 
It's safe to say that Vega holds enough promise to prevent me from buying a GTX 1070/1080 - I've resisted upgrading thus far, so it makes sense to at least wait and see how Vega pans out.

I've got a feeling that Vega will be decent competition for nVidia in the top end - the crucial thing will be cost as much as performance.
 
As long as its faster than 1070 I'm geting one.

Not buying NV crap with no proper DX12 support SIMPLE :)
 
Nope

X34 here plus AMD will be a let down like it always is :p

I hope this is not the case though I really want Ryzen to kick intels butt cheeks :p
 
that'd be a no from me. Got a Gsync screen and a GTX 1080 so whatever the performance and price Vega has, makes no difference to me. I plan to keep my card for the full 5 years :)
 
No, but I'm hoping it'll offer stiff competition to Nvidia at a lower (not taking us for more mugs) price point and therefore allow me to buy a 1070 at a more reasonable price.


Not holding my breath tbh.
 
Nope only just got a 1080 hybrid but I really do hope they do extremely well and have the best cards for a while. Loved ati cards my 9800xt and x800xl were beast back in the day.
 
One thing this threads highlights is that both AMD and Nvidia have people trapped due to the monitor they own. I think both companies are as guilty as each other over this. Nvidia I think got their first so AMD released 'Free'sync but it's a shame both companies cant just decide which is the best tech and both move forward with it, unless they're of course vastly different and offer advantages other than of course trapping customers.
Either way being tied to GPU's because of the Sync tech is rubbish :)

I'm still rocking with a non-sync monitor and loving it :D
 
DarrenM343;30488015 said:
One thing this threads highlights is that both AMD and Nvidia have people trapped due to the monitor they own. I think both companies are as guilty as each other over this. Nvidia I think got their first so AMD released 'Free'sync but it's a shame both companies cant just decide which is the best tech and both move forward with it, unless they're of course vastly different and offer advantages other than of course trapping customers.
Either way being tied to GPU's because of the Sync tech is rubbish :)

I'm still rocking with a non-sync monitor and loving it :D
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree, but really out of the two Freesync is just the lesser of the two evils.

It's free for nVidia to adopt in terms of licensing (at this point it's just stubbornness), plus you don't pay the quite frankly stupid amounts to get a G-Sync module in your screen. I mean take the Dell S2716DG as an example - if you'd come to me five years ago and asked £600 for a 1440p TN i'd have laughed in your face.
 
My superwide monitor hasn't got gysnc or freesync but looking at the choices of monitors for superwide I could see myself going freesync even though I got an nvidia card.
 
DarrenM343;30488015 said:
One thing this threads highlights is that both AMD and Nvidia have people trapped due to the monitor they own. I think both companies are as guilty as each other over this. Nvidia I think got their first so AMD released 'Free'sync but it's a shame both companies cant just decide which is the best tech and both move forward with it, unless they're of course vastly different and offer advantages other than of course trapping customers.
Either way being tied to GPU's because of the Sync tech is rubbish :)

I'm still rocking with a non-sync monitor and loving it :P
Click to expand...

From where I am looking it is Nvidia that is trapping people, not AMD. Nvidia can overnight enable support of their cards on Freesync monitors if they chose to. Nvidia could also likely allow AMD cards to work on their G-Sync cards, but they won't.

Nvidia could solve all this over might if they wanted. But obviously being a business they want to milk people as much as they can as long as people allow them to do so.

If enough people made a big enough fuss about it and put pressure on Nvidia, at the very least they would allow their cards to work on Freesync monitors and continue their G-sync line as some kind of premium thing. But they really do not want to do that, as anyone who knows what's what will not bother with G-sync after that :p
 
TNA;30488057 said:
From where I am looking it is Nvidia that is trapping people, not AMD. Nvidia can overnight enable support of their cards on Freesync monitors if they chose to. Nvidia could also likely allow AMD cards to work on their G-Sync cards, but they won't.

Nvidia could solve all this over might if they wanted. But obviously being a business they want to milk people as much as they can as long as people allow them to do so.

If enough people made a big enough fuss about it and put pressure on Nvidia, at the very least they would allow their cards to work on Freesync monitors and continue their G-sync line as some kind of premium thing. But they really do not want to do that, as anyone who knows what's what will not bother with G-sync after that :p
Click to expand...

Why not the other way round? Isn't g-sync supposed to be the better tech? Why cant AMD cards be made to work on g-syc? :D I know Freesync has the word "free" attached to it and people prefer it for that but I think if AMD had got to the tech first they'd probably not have tried to make it free and open.
Anyway, we shouldn't care but I think we should pressure both parties to get over it and release now a common standard - even if the monitors are priced a bit higher so both companies can make a few extra £. So if g-sync better then sod it, lets have that as the common standard, or vicevesa.
Or, why cant we have monitors with both g-sync and freesync? I think many would pay a premium over the current g-sync premium for that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom