Nvidia's started supporting FreeSync

It's probably an oversight in the driver and will be patched with the next release or hotfix.
The fact that it only works windowed suggests it's a bug.
 
They updated the article.

Update 9/30/18 3:22 AM: After further research and the collection of more high-speed camera footage from our G-Sync displays, I believe the tear-free gameplay we're experiencing on our FreeSync displays in combination with GeForces is a consequence of Windows 10's Desktop Window Manager adding some form of Vsync to the proceedings when games are in borderless windowed mode, rather than any form of VESA Adapative-Sync being engaged with our GeForce cards. Pending a response from Nvidia as to just what we're experiencing, I'd warn against drawing any conclusions from our observations at this time and sincerely apologize for any misleading conclusions we've presented in our original article. The original piece continues below for posterity.
 
I really have my eye on those Glossy freesync Dell monitors that support freesync. Vega said they are not glossy but they have a glossy coating so they are still glossy if not true glossy :p

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/blog/de...f-gaming-monitors-with-glossy-screen-coating/

On another note there are alot of monitors out there that are cheaper than the Gysync versions. I mean like 100.00+ cheaper which makes a big difference.
 
fs123 said:
The fact that it even works at all exposes Nvidia's claim that a hardware module is required as BS. They are taking everyone for a ride.
Click to expand...

A hardware module is required for desktop cards if you don't have the hardware to support display port 1.2a.

And if you haven't been paying attention, this was a windows desktop issue. Nvidia cards still don't work with adaptive sync in desktop monitors.
 
Bit of a news flash for you guys. A guy on reddit (the original AMD apu+Nvidia Gpu leaker) has updated his post with a link to another blokes post who has created a proper workaround for users with both AMD and Nvidia gpu's. Basically allows you to use an AMD gpu as the output with the green team doing the workload.

He is after testers so if any of you are keen, I reckon have at it. I myself am even considering buying an rx550 just so I can put my freesync gaming tv to use.
 
This is far from adding freesync. Not like you can plug and play also this has been available on mobile geforce cards. AKA mobile gsync. So nothing new. As someone said driver oversight, I wouldn't go out and by nvidia card for freesync just because of this.

Also I saw linus's video on the workaround as well where you plug in AMD card. Honestly I agree with him if you are going to go through all that just buy a gsync monitor and be done with it. Or by an AMD card and enjoy free sync because with free sync I haven't beeen able to really care too much about FPS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
NKD said:
This is far from adding freesync. Not like you can plug and play also this has been available on mobile geforce cards. AKA mobile gsync. So nothing new. As someone said driver oversight, I wouldn't go out and by nvidia card for freesync just because of this.

Also I saw linus's video on the workaround as well where you plug in AMD card. Honestly I agree with him if you are going to go through all that just buy a gsync monitor and be done with it. Or by an AMD card and enjoy free sync because with free sync I haven't beeen able to really care too much about FPS.
Click to expand...

Two things, Stop comparing Nvidia's desktop Gsync with their mobile implementation and concluding that Nvidia didn't have to make module.. It's very simple, laptop GPU's have to stick to the eDP specification which is why you don't need a Gsync module, because the specification requires the GPU to have the necessary hardware to use the power saving features. For the desktop display port specification the requirements for Adaptive sync are entirely optional and didn't exist at all until 8 months after Gsync was launched.

Second thing, you don't need an AMD GPU for the work around. IF you have an APU it will work just as well. So any AMD CPU with an integrated GPU from 2013 will work. While it a might be a pain right now to do it, going forward there might be more people using it as AMD CPU's are getting more popular and their GPU's are going to be in some Intel CPUs as well.
 
reaper12 said:
Two things, Stop comparing Nvidia's desktop Gsync with their mobile implementation and concluding that Nvidia didn't have to make module.. It's very simple, laptop GPU's have to stick to the eDP specification which is why you don't need a Gsync module, because the specification requires the GPU to have the necessary hardware to use the power saving features. For the desktop display port specification the requirements for Adaptive sync are entirely optional and didn't exist at all until 8 months after Gsync was launched.

Second thing, you don't need an AMD GPU for the work around. IF you have an APU it will work just as well. So any AMD CPU with an integrated GPU from 2013 will work. While it a might be a pain right now to do it, going forward there might be more people using it as AMD CPU's are getting more popular and their GPU's are going to be in some Intel CPUs as well.
Click to expand...
One would think Nvidia $1200 card coming out in 2018, years after Adaptive sync has been around, it would support via Display port the standard. Now Adaptive Sync is supported with a number via HDMI to UHDTV's, which once again Nvidia does not support. So those having an ultra high end HDR TV is better supported by AMD than Nvidia.
 
NKD said:
This is far from adding freesync. Not like you can plug and play also this has been available on mobile geforce cards. AKA mobile gsync. So nothing new. As someone said driver oversight, I wouldn't go out and by nvidia card for freesync just because of this.

Also I saw linus's video on the workaround as well where you plug in AMD card. Honestly I agree with him if you are going to go through all that just buy a gsync monitor and be done with it. Or by an AMD card and enjoy free sync because with free sync I haven't beeen able to really care too much about FPS.
Click to expand...

This does NOT INCLUDE an apu of any kind.

handy for those upgraded from an amd to nvidia card.

See the link below:

 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
noko said:
One would think Nvidia $1200 card coming out in 2018, years after Adaptive sync has been around, it would support via Display port the standard. Now Adaptive Sync is supported with a number via HDMI to UHDTV's, which once again Nvidia does not support. So those having an ultra high end HDR TV is better supported by AMD than Nvidia.
Click to expand...


Why would Nvidia support Adaptive sync when it will be competing against Gsync? That would make no sense from a business point of view. They are making money on Gsync monitors and tying customers into their brand as a Gsync monitor could last 2 or 3 generations of GPU and the owners are going to buy Nvidia GPUs to keep Gsync.

VRR on HDMI through a PC is a niche of a niche market though at the moment. Certainly nothing that either company will make money on.
 
Mauler87 said:
This does NOT INCLUDE an apu of any kind.

handy for those upgraded from an amd to nvidia card.

See the link below:

Click to expand...

I was talking about 2 separate things. APUs and the new nvidia driver thing. Now if you already have a nvidia gpu then it makes sense if you want to save some money on monitor and get freesync monitor instead of gsync. But if you already rocking a rx580 or a vega card its pointless to switch to nvidia card. You are right it makes sense if you already got nvidia. In which case it helps AMD where they sell lower end cards and it moves freesync monitor.

I got a freesync 2 samsung HDR 32inch monitor and that is the only reason I went with vega 64. It runs butter smooth on everything. if you are buying everything then it kinda makes no sense to buy nvidia card and then amd card, just buy a decent AMD card and enjoy freesync 2. Works great.
 
reaper12 said:
Why would Nvidia support Adaptive sync when it will be competing against Gsync? That would make no sense from a business point of view. They are making money on Gsync monitors and tying customers into their brand as a Gsync monitor could last 2 or 3 generations of GPU and the owners are going to buy Nvidia GPUs to keep Gsync.

VRR on HDMI through a PC is a niche of a niche market though at the moment. Certainly nothing that either company will make money on.
Click to expand...
To support their customers, customer service is one reason I can think of. Totally sucks that the only Gsync HDR monitor on the market is $2000! Yeah, lets ray trace with brilliant definition but limit it to SDR monitors or HDR monitors with FreeSync with tearing :bucktooth:. Yeah I really want to go down that route. So I may use my new incoming FreeSyncw 2, HDR 600, Quantum Dot, 144mhz monitor ($426) with the 1080 Ti SLI using adaptive VSync since Nvidia has nothing out there like that using Gsync unless one forks over $2000. Better yet, I just use it with AMD Radeons and have smooth game play vice meaningless high frame rates with tearing and stutter.
 
Does it really matter if it's a driver issue or a Windows fluke, if the result is a better gaming experience?

Maybe that's just placebo effect based on the author of the article seeing a "Freesync Enabled" light come on, but they describe that the games are running with less tearing and such. Who cares why if it really is working for some reason.
 
Brian_B said:
Does it really matter if it's a driver issue or a Windows fluke, if the result is a better gaming experience?

Maybe that's just placebo effect based on the author of the article seeing a "Freesync Enabled" light come on, but they describe that the games are running with less tearing and such. Who cares why if it really is working for some reason.
Click to expand...
What is funny, he was getting a better experience, smooth game play with much slower FPS VSync rates. Meaning FPS is not the tell tell sign for a better game experience. The wasted rendering way above refresh rates of a monitor gives virtually zero benefits, stutter, tearing and at best reduce lag that only a few would even notice or can take advantage of. If Nvidia support FreeSync then many with 1070's, 1080's, even older generation would see a sudden improvement in the gaming experience and may decide it would be pointless buying a faster, higher priced card when their games already are butter smooth. Nvidia could never let that happen.
 
noko said:
What is funny, he was getting a better experience, smooth game play with much slower FPS VSync rates. Meaning FPS is not the tell tell sign for a better game experience. The wasted rendering way above refresh rates of a monitor gives virtually zero benefits, stutter, tearing and at best reduce lag that only a few would even notice or can take advantage of. If Nvidia support FreeSync then many with 1070's, 1080's, even older generation would see a sudden improvement in the gaming experience and may decide it would be pointless buying a faster, higher priced card when their games already are butter smooth. Nvidia could never let that happen.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. I got the vega for 499 and sold off all the games for like 80. so technically brand new vega 64 nitro+ for like 420. Top that with the freesync 2 HDR 1440p monitor, honestly Its been a delightful experience. I absolutely do not feel for one bit I need a faster cards. Its just a smooth experience.
 
NKD said:
I couldn't agree more. I got the vega for 499 and sold off all the games for like 80. so technically brand new vega 64 nitro+ for like 420. Top that with the freesync 2 HDR 1440p monitor, honestly Its been a delightful experience. I absolutely do not feel for one bit I need a faster cards. Its just a smooth experience.
Click to expand...
Maybe too many have been convinced, brainwashed, mistaken that more FPS = Better. The whole experience or combination of CPU/GPU/Monitor or display device like in VR needs to be evaluated and not just concentrating on numbers where many graphs will say higher is better. For 60 hz monitor owners (by far the vast majority) rendering past 60 FPS in many cases degrades smoothness, gives tearing, stutter etc. Vsync is also not smooth and gives additional lag. FreeSync seems to be the magic sauce that is well supported, works well and improves the game experience with current and previous generation GPUs. Nvidia does not want to give that improved gaming experience, unless you also pay an additional amount to get the privilege to use their Gsync over priced monitors. Also good luck in getting a Gsync HDR monitor for less than $2000, HDR is another improved gaming experience option, with the many FreeSync monitors with HDR, even 144 hz for less than $400, why is Nvidia not giving you, me or anyone that option to improve our gaming experience?

https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100898493 600559797 600559798&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&SrchInDesc=HDR&Page=1&PageSize=96&order=PRICE
 
noko said:
Maybe too many have been convinced, brainwashed, mistaken that more FPS = Better. The whole experience or combination of CPU/GPU/Monitor or display device like in VR needs to be evaluated and not just concentrating on numbers where many graphs will say higher is better. For 60 hz monitor owners (by far the vast majority) rendering past 60 FPS in many cases degrades smoothness, gives tearing, stutter etc. Vsync is also not smooth and gives additional lag. FreeSync seems to be the magic sauce that is well supported, works well and improves the game experience with current and previous generation GPUs. Nvidia does not want to give that improved gaming experience, unless you also pay an additional amount to get the privilege to use their Gsync over priced monitors. Also good luck in getting a Gsync HDR monitor for less than $2000, HDR is another improved gaming experience option, with the many FreeSync monitors with HDR, even 144 hz for less than $400, why is Nvidia not giving you, me or anyone that option to improve our gaming experience?

https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100898493 600559797 600559798&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&SrchInDesc=HDR&Page=1&PageSize=96&order=PRICE
Click to expand...

Yea thats what I don't understand and I finally changed my setup. I got rid of my 1080ti and gsync monitor that wasn't HDR and was only 100hz. I actually broke even or more as I didn't buy them new anyways lol. But I am not sure whey nvidia wants to charge 2k. I got my 144hz 32 inch monitor for 539, quantom dot, hdr600. I mean this thing pops in hdr games. To me another 1500 is not worth whatever nvidia is selling even if its 4k or whatever. Its really insane how much more nvidia wants for gsync hdr. I mean people can put it under a microscope and say hey gsync is better. But to my eyes freesync 2 works just as good if not better. Its butter smooth for me, and in games that support HDR its even better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
NKD said:
Yea thats what I don't understand and I finally changed my setup. I got rid of my 1080ti and gsync monitor that wasn't HDR and was only 100hz. I actually broke even or more as I didn't buy them new anyways lol. But I am not sure whey nvidia wants to charge 2k. I got my 144hz 32 inch monitor for 539, quantom dot, hdr600. I mean this thing pops in hdr games. To me another 1500 is not worth whatever nvidia is selling even if its 4k or whatever. Its really insane how much more nvidia wants for gsync hdr. I mean people can put it under a microscope and say hey gsync is better. But to my eyes freesync 2 works just as good if not better. Its butter smooth for me, and in games that support HDR its even better.
Click to expand...
Got my Quantom Dot, HDR 600, 144 MHz yesterday - what a treat! HDR/FreeSync2 makes a significant difference in FarCry 5! Very nice indeed. Since using two Vega FEs in CFX, I upped the rendering to 1.5, maxed all the settings but disabled motion blur (my eyes will do that just fine) and getting around 90 FPS. The fast refresh monitor does make motion much sharper. Anyways favorably impressed so far. HDR in windows I had to turn up the HDR brightness adjustment which made it OK. I have the 4K FreeSync monitor next to it and they both work at native refresh rates/resolution and the 4K is SDR and the 1440P in HDR with Windows extended.
 
noko said:
Got my Quantom Dot, HDR 600, 144 MHz yesterday - what a treat! HDR/FreeSync2 makes a significant difference in FarCry 5! Very nice indeed. Since using two Vega FEs in CFX, I upped the rendering to 1.5, maxed all the settings but disabled motion blur (my eyes will do that just fine) and getting around 90 FPS. The fast refresh monitor does make motion much sharper. Anyways favorably impressed so far. HDR in windows I had to turn up the HDR brightness adjustment which made it OK. I have the 4K FreeSync monitor next to it and they both work at native refresh rates/resolution and the 4K is SDR and the 1440P in HDR with Windows extended.
Click to expand...

Which LCD did you get? I have been in the market for something new myself, as I am spaced constrained and 1080P isn't cutting it (had to choose it for FS gaming, or my 1440P for work stuff but 1080P won out) since I constantly have to resize and move windows etc. Its a PITA...I was looking for 32~35 (if UW) 1440P 100Hz+ with FS/FS2 (will be driven by a 1750/1100mhz 56 or 2/3x for demanding games with good X-fire support)...
 
GSync sucks. I want my gaming PC to double as a work PC, meaning I want a professional monitor. There are plenty of FreeSync displays that meet this requirement, but very limited GSync options. The GSync monitors on the market are universally expensive and have that awful, tacky "gaming" aesthetic. NVidia is trying to double dip, making money from graphics card sales and royalties from monitor manufactures. Not the greatest position to be in as a consumer. If they were to start supporting FreeSync, that would be fantastic, though I doubt it will ever happen officially.
 
Epos7 said:
GSync sucks. I want my gaming PC to double as a work PC, meaning I want a professional monitor. There are plenty of FreeSync displays that meet this requirement, but very limited GSync options. The GSync monitors on the market are universally expensive and have that awful, tacky "gaming" aesthetic. NVidia is trying to double dip, making money from graphics card sales and royalties from monitor manufactures. Not the greatest position to be in as a consumer. If they were to start supporting FreeSync, that would be fantastic, though I doubt it will ever happen officially.
Click to expand...

If Nvidia decided to support freesync I would buy one of their cards. Because they don't, I will continue to buy AMD cards no matter the performance gap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top