To be fair to sin, earlier inthis thread you were telling everyone that there will definitely be firmware upgrades "confirmed"
Are you serious? I really can't tell.
To be fair to sin, earlier inthis thread you were telling everyone that there will definitely be firmware upgrades "confirmed"
I'm not sure what that has to do with this particular avenue of the discussion
Unless the Syncs are free, the only market I can see for Gysnc is from the fanboys (I mean no offence by this) and ill informed
what component of the monitor provides those features?
Direct reply to
G-Sync is not free, "FreeSync" will not be either.
FreeSync is an unknown at this stage. Even if it performs 'better' than G-Sync for less cost there is still cost and and complexity associated with it.
You STILL require a compatible AMD card so it's not simply a matter of FreeSync launching and being a universal solution.
G-SYNC and FreeSync will be direct competitors. But I would make a relatively well founded presumption now, that being:
- Current AMD owners will opt for FreeSync monitors
- Current nvidia owners will opt for G-SYNC monitors
- Neither G-SYNC or FreeSync will offer any real tangible benefit over the other to warrant a GPU brand swap
- FreeSync Monitors will not offer a price point that will entice a nVidia GPU owner to opt for a FreeSync monitor with GPU swap.
Since you seem to want this stupid argument about your precious Gsync "MODULE" so I am going to give it to you.
Name me one monitor that list features by the name of the internal PCB? If you can I will accept your argument.
And your argument is so silly, If you took out the electronics from any monitor it wouldn't work.
You are just arguing to make Gsync look better. I bet if you said "Gsync module" in normal conversation, most people would assume that you were talking about the part of the monitor that makes Gsync work, not the whole internal electronics of the monitor.
SO again, 3D and ULMB are features of a monitor, just like Gsync is a feature of a monitor. They aren't features of each other. They will never be called features of the Gsync module by anyone, apart from you, because they have nothing to do with Gsync.
Direct reply to
G-Sync is not free, "FreeSync" will not be either.
FreeSync is an unknown at this stage. Even if it performs 'better' than G-Sync for less cost there is still cost and and complexity associated with it.
You STILL require a compatible AMD card so it's not simply a matter of FreeSync launching and being a universal solution.
G-SYNC and FreeSync will be direct competitors. But I would make a relatively well founded presumption now, that being:
- Current AMD owners will opt for FreeSync monitors
- Current nvidia owners will opt for G-SYNC monitors
- Neither G-SYNC or FreeSync will offer any real tangible benefit over the other to warrant a GPU brand swap
- FreeSync Monitors will not offer a price point that will entice a nVidia GPU owner to opt for a FreeSync monitor with GPU swap.
I've already been over this with Andy. You do realise the market will set the price based on demand. Thats the way of the world.
You say this like you know the RRP of FreeSync displays. Do you?
I think everyone is in for a surprise.
Not really. Gamer Technology does not follow ordinary market trends.
FreeSync is nothing but a gamer technology, nobody will buy FreeSync for any other reason.
Demand will outstrip supply, as is demonstrated by the ASUS ROG Swift. You will pay a premium for it, it's a niche product for a niche market.
Hardware partners will be able to implement FreeSync for very very little, unless AMD are charging excessive licensing fees - but even then, it's going to be minimal. Hardware partner will implement FreeSync into comparatively low volume products (compared to run of the mill desktop monitors) and charge a premium for it. They can afford to do this as the product is so very niche. They are not looking to sell HUGE volumes with low profit margins, the market (IE Gamers) does not support such a model.
The bottom line is this - FreeSync will be a (comparatively) low volume product for a niche market, it's pricing will reflect that.
If you believe anything else is the case you are sorely misguided.
Thats the thing though. The way FreeSync has been implemented means it will be mass market. Sure, the early rush will have an effect, but after that FreeSync will be just like any other monitor as it's a standard VESA feature.
It's not Freesync. It's Adaptive Sync. There's a big difference. Plus, there's a very limited amount of GPU's that currently support adaptive sync (Which by AMD is through Freesync, which is the limitation, the GPU's actually with Freesync are in the minority. We're talking the 290/290X/285/260X/295X)
And it isn't a *standard* VESA feature. It's *optional*.
You seriously sound like you've followed hype without context.
I think the future is bright personally, and Intel/Nvidia can freely adopt adaptive sync through their own proprietary named method (Freesync equivalent). Which will encourage more and more monitors.
But then it's all about price point too. A lot of people just buy the first 100 pound 1080p display they see. Adaptive Sync would literally need to become a mandatory standard to be fully mainstream (Which personally, I hope is the future)
We've been over this already. How can I put this in a way a fanboy can get his head around it... The industry has *opted in* so FreeSync = insidious take over of all the monitors. You can't call off the dogs of war?
What you're typing is factually wrong, and in the context shows a lack of understanding about the situation.
Why is correcting you making me a fanboy?