AMD freesync

Was just about to post that myself. Sounds very promising since they are doing it without additional harware or cost.
 
I'm very interested to see what comes of this. Not being vendor locked would be great.

From the TechReport preview:
Turns out it's not that simple. Doing refreshes at varying intervals creates all sorts of havoc for LCDs, including color/gamma shifting and the like.
Click to expand...
Another thing to watch out for -- Have monitor makers implemented the variable refresh correctly? Or is Nvidia exaggerating the color correcting issues?
 
gzboli said:
Another thing to watch out for -- Have monitor makers implemented the variable refresh correctly? Or is Nvidia exaggerating the color correcting issues?
Click to expand...
I don't see why that would be an issue.
There are monitors that work just fine from 24 to 120+ hz
Probably just excuses for the delay
 
Freesync can only speculate about vblank intervals while GSync can actually control them. How will this affect real world performance? I'm not sure.

I think, however, that we *do* need the additional tools resources provided by the GSync monitor if we want to make monitors a total slave to the GPU.

In AMD's implementation, VBLANK length (interval between two refresh cycles where the GPU isn't putting out "new" frames, a sort of placebo frames) is variable, and the driver has to speculate what VBLANK length to set for the next frame; whereas, in NVIDIA's implementation, the display holds onto a VBLANK until the next frame is received. In NVIDIA's implementation, the GPU sends out whatever frame-rate the hardware can manage, while the monitor handles the "sync" part. In AMD's the speculation involved in setting the right VBLANK length for the next frame could cause some software overhead for the host system. That overhead is transferred to the display in NVIDIA's implementation. We're looking forward to AMD's whitepaper on FreeSync. AMD holds the advantage when it comes to keeping costs down when implementing the technology. Display makers have to simply implement something that VESA is already deliberating over. The Toshiba laptops AMD used in its FreeSync demo at CES already do.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Interesting in theory and in a small demo but considering its really only "in the lab" at the moment and would require some broader support plus the lack of a strategy to market it means we won't be seeing it for quite a while.

I'm curious if it can also reproduce the same results of G-sync with also not impacting input latency. One of the biggest benefits of having hardware to do it was taking the load off , I'm curious if pushing the load off to the card will mean some kind of latency increase.

Still if AMD can get this off the ground with the proper support more power to them. But as a G-sync owner I'm wary of AMD being able to do it without extra hardware support and coming out with the same results as G-sync. I'm also even more doubtful that if its really down to drivers if AMD can have it stable out of the gate the way Nvidia has.
 
sverreerik said:
Freesync can only speculate about vblank intervals while GSync can actually control them. How will this affect real world performance? I'm not sure.
Click to expand...
If the demo AMD did is any proof then it doesn't seem to be an issue at all. Anand and others were impressed with the results.

Godmachine said:
the lack of a strategy to market it means we won't be seeing it for quite a while.
Click to expand...
But what strategy is needed? If they get their request granted with DP1.2a or wait for DP1.3 either way FreeSync will be able to work and the driver support is already done. The great thing about FreeSync is that besides being free to the end user it shouldn't require any monitor manufacturer support.

Godmachine said:
I'm also even more doubtful that if its really down to drivers if AMD can have it stable out of the gate the way Nvidia has.
Click to expand...
Why? AMD already has to support the function for laptop displays which was why they used them during their demo. Also AMD single card drivers are fine and have been since at least the 4xxx series cards. CF is still a bit hit and miss but even that has improved dramatically with the 7xxx and R9 290/X.
 
mesyn191 said:
If the demo AMD did is any proof then it doesn't seem to be an issue at all. Anand and others were impressed with the results.
Click to expand...

One demo isn't really enough to close the book on it. Its a Demo , people were quite skeptical of G-sync until they actually got time with it.

mesyn191 said:
But what strategy is needed? If they get their request granted with DP1.2a or wait for DP1.3 either way FreeSync will be able to work and the driver support is already done. The great thing about FreeSync is that besides being free to the end user it shouldn't require any monitor manufacturer support.
Click to expand...

Considering the press G-sync has got it would be foolish of AMD not to advertise this feature once they get it finalized. Freesync will require DP 1.3 if they don't get DP 1.2a so that means a new monitor that supports it. If they get DP 1.2a then that could work out great for them.


mesyn191 said:
Why? AMD already has to support the function for laptop displays which was why they used them during their demo. Also AMD single card drivers are fine and have been since at least the 4xxx series cards. CF is still a bit hit and miss but even that has improved dramatically with the 7xxx and R9 290/X.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but that is a gigantic matter of personal opinion. I've owned many AMD and Nvidia cards and based on my personal experience I find Nvidia drivers more stable and feature packed. I don't have anything against AMD and I think that in terms of bang for the buck they are the king but I know that if I'm buying Nvidia I'm going to get solid drivers.

This is also of big concern :

In AMD's the speculation involved in setting the right VBLANK length for the next frame could cause some software overhead for the host system. That overhead is transferred to the display in NVIDIA's implementation. We're looking forward to AMD's whitepaper on FreeSync.
Click to expand...

Meaning performance hit. Which could also mean input latency. Both of which would be an issue and if Nvidia can do the same thing without a larger performance hit and without input latency then it would be the superior job. When you take something you know that works well in hardware form (G-sync) and propose a software form of doing a similar technique then it has to involve some extra overhead.

I'm game either way. But right now I feel (personally) that Nvidia offers a better setup. Once Nvidia can get the price down enough and if AMD can get Freesync out the planning stages then we'll have an interesting choice to make.
 
Last edited:
paulgur said:
All monitor with 1.2a support are able to AMD FreeSynch ?
Click to expand...

Yes. All you'd need is a firmware update. :D

This is the cheapest upcoming monitor that will support it, Lenovo ThinkVision Pro2840m 3840x2160. It'll be available in April at $799.
 
there are more models with DP 1.2a ( almost all next products ).

for all this models we must only wait ad simple firmware ?
So i can buy Dell U2414H or P2414H and i can run FreeSync with next firmware ?
 
If AMD gets their way yes. Its a long shot though.

Godmachine said:
One demo isn't really enough to close the book on it.
Click to expand...
Correct. Still the fact that they were able to do the demo with a existing product using existing AMD hardware and without hacking it up is a very good sign.

Godmachine said:
Considering the press G-sync has got it would be foolish of AMD not to advertise this feature once they get it finalized. Freesync will require DP 1.3 if they don't get DP 1.2a so that means a new monitor that supports it. If they get DP 1.2a then that could work out great for them.
Click to expand...
FreeSync has already gotten a fair amount of press already too though just by AMD doing the demo. For the people who actually care about that sort of thing, almost entirely PC gaming enthusiasts, the press work is essentially done. Its certainly true if they don't get the change they want added to DP1.2a then you'd still need to buy a DP1.3 monitor but that is still significantly cheaper than GSync which requires specialized low volume hardware which even if they switch to a custom ASIC rather than a FPGA will still be quite a bit more expensive than a common DP1.3 monitor.

It also of course locks you in to 1 GPU vendor. Whether they get FreeSync working with DP1.2a or DP1.3 FreeSync is clearly able to provide better value over all and is a win for everybody not just AMD or AMD users.

Godmachine said:
I'm sorry but that is a gigantic matter of personal opinion.
Click to expand...
Well I'd say its not but I don't have any good 3rd party sources that measure driver stability to link to so fair enough.

Godmachine said:
This is also of big concern : Meaning performance hit. Which could also mean input latency.
Click to expand...
Sure but its likely to be insignificant, they just have to predict the monitor refresh rate not the lotto numbers after all. There is a reason why current monitor controllers are based off simple ARM or MIPS cores that emphasize power usage and cost over performance.
 
paulgur said:
there are more models with DP 1.2a ( almost all next products ).

for all this models we must only wait ad simple firmware ?
So i can buy Dell U2414H or P2414H and i can run FreeSync with next firmware ?
Click to expand...

And just how do you plan on updating the monitor's firmware?

Don't jizz your pants and buy a random monitor with DP 1.2a and expect to be able to use FreeSync.

First off, it probably will never even happen with DP 1.2a.
Secondly, you have a long wait before anything is going to hit the market.

They don't even have a proof of concept yet with a real monitor.
 
mesyn191 said:
FreeSync has already gotten a fair amount of press already too though just by AMD doing the demo. For the people who actually care about that sort of thing, almost entirely PC gaming enthusiasts, the press work is essentially done. Its certainly true if they don't get the change they want added to DP1.2a then you'd still need to buy a DP1.3 monitor but that is still significantly cheaper than GSync which requires specialized low volume hardware which even if they switch to a custom ASIC rather than a FPGA will still be quite a bit more expensive than a common DP1.3 monitor.
Click to expand...

Except you are already talking about a confined sector of buyers , in this case gamers. Gamers are willing to spend more money for features that are confined to a single user base so I don't think it'll somehow be cheaper with the requirement of a DP 1.3 monitor by much and especially so during the early days of the technology when DP 1.3 monitors are not common place. If AMD can get approval for DP 1.2a then it would be a major victory. Otherwise we're talking new hardware which kinda takes out the thunder from the "free" aspect and since this applies only to AMD users its of no use for Nvidia users who are forced to use G-sync or buy a new GPU and possibly a new monitor if DP 1.3 is required.

mesyn191 said:
Well I'd say its not but I don't have any good 3rd party sources that measure driver stability to link to so fair enough.
Click to expand...

Again a matter of opinion. Some will swear that AMD has better single GPU drivers and worse multi card drivers and some will say the exact opposite. Its an individual experience across the board. Any website that claims otherwise is just going to skew its own results based on its own experience. Unless there is a widely accepted and non-varied experience going on during one generation of card the general experience varies. I have 2 290's and 2 GTX 670's. I've had great experiences with both and not many problems to speak of. But that doesn't matter ..because its my personal experience.
 
Godmachine said:
Except you are already talking about a confined sector of buyers...Gamers are willing to spend more money for features ...during the early days of the technology when DP 1.3 monitors are not common place...Otherwise we're talking new hardware which kinda takes out the thunder from the "free" aspect and since this applies only to AMD users
Click to expand...
So gamers are a tiny niche of a niche of the PC market but DP is a widespread standard that the entire PC market is slowly moving to. Gamers will be able to take advantage of the economy of scale that will offer them when every monitor is FreeSync capable out of the box.

Price gouging of early adopters of niche products is something that happens all the time and while certainly not a good thing it also isn't a mark itself against a standard or new technology. It is a problem with the retailers. DP1.2a and eventually DP1.3 monitors are/will be mass produced, widespread, and commonly found commodity products. Price gouging will be unlikely and at worst short lived.

A DP1.2a/3 monitor will always be cheaper, probably dramatically so, than a GSync monitor due to the economy of scale it can leverage + the lack of specialized custom hardware. There is no getting around the price advantage there. Also NV will be able to update its hardware/drivers to take advantage of FreeSync. It isn't a AMD only liscenced feature or tech which was half the point of AMD's presentation.

sharknice said:
They don't even have a proof of concept yet with a real monitor.
Click to expand...
AMD's presentation used common unmodified laptops with generic commoditiy panels. That is certainly at least a proof-of-concept and IMO half way to being a finished product.
 
Last edited:
Except G-sync will be an $99 extra according to early release figures in price. I think within an extra year that price will shrink by 50 percent or more and eventually be an expected feature. Its not something that will simply hold its cost as Nvidia will want it across as many monitors as they can get it on. That's why I don't think even with the "free" nature possibly of Freesync that its the end all be all solution either. Both are very limiting and force users to decide which brand they want and what type of technology they consider to be of more value. Also like its been mentioned the performance hit is still in question as is the input latency. It many only be minor but gamers consider anything over say a 5-10 percent hit to be pretty unacceptable.

Right now with Freesync still largely in the "lab" we can't really form certain opinions on it. I don't think its worth any extra excitement until say Anandtech (just throwing out a web site that does great in depth articles on technology like this) gets their hands on it and digs in. I wish actually AMD would give us a time frame of when they intend to start to roll this out. I know they are awaiting certification of a slightly altered DP standard but now that G-sync will be rolled out to the masses and out of the DIY crazies like me then people will have to decide if A) This technology matters to them B) If it does then do they want Nvidia's version which is proven to work and works practically without fail or C) Wait until both are on the market and see what the census is.

My recommendation? Go for C.
 
I don't think you're properly appreciating the difference $99 makes on a product that tends to run $300 for a "cheap" monitor. Look at all the crap people put up with trying save buying those Korean LCD's: janky construction, low-to-no support chain, extra special dead or stuck pixel panel lotto, etc.

For most a $99 price difference + vendor lock in will be a deal breaker for GSync. The PC gaming market is already pretty darn low volume and you need decent volume sales to take advantage of economy of scale and get those 50% or more price cuts. So that line of thought doesn't really seem to be panning out here.

For some reason you keep thinking FreeSync will be AMD only, why? If its built into the spec there is no reason NV can't or wouldn't be able to support it with a driver update so long as they eventually put out a DP1.2a/3 compatible GPU. Which they certainly will at some point, probably by late this year, certainly early next year.
 
This will def knock gsync out IF it works under the same premise. People complain about mantle being proprietary when a all the while NV is the one trying to lock you down vendor specific.

There can be 2 thoughts of process on this:

A) Nvidia wants to lock users in hardware level by making it can external module only regulated by its drivers.

B) in order to bring it to the table now, NV requires a hardware fix. Keeps from having to deal with years of waiting for implementation from monitor vendors like AMD will have to.

IF freesync does come out in a hurry by gaming monitor vendors, gsync will be in trouble if it provides the same solution for free. The advantage AMD will have is it will eventually be a available on every monitor years down the road if it gets picked up on the DP spec.
 
Last edited:
mesyn191 said:
So gamers are a tiny niche of a niche of the PC market but DP is a widespread standard that the entire PC market is slowly moving to. Gamers will be able to take advantage of the economy of scale that will offer them when every monitor is FreeSync capable out of the box.

Price gouging of early adopters of niche products is something that happens all the time and while certainly not a good thing it also isn't a mark itself against a standard or new technology. It is a problem with the retailers. DP1.2a and eventually DP1.3 monitors are/will be mass produced, widespread, and commonly found commodity products. Price gouging will be unlikely and at worst short lived.

A DP1.2a/3 monitor will always be cheaper, probably dramatically so, than a GSync monitor due to the economy of scale it can leverage + the lack of specialized custom hardware. There is no getting around the price advantage there. Also NV will be able to update its hardware/drivers to take advantage of FreeSync. It isn't a AMD only liscenced feature or tech which was half the point of AMD's presentation.


AMD's presentation used common unmodified laptops with generic commoditiy panels. That is certainly at least a proof-of-concept and IMO half way to being a finished product.
Click to expand...

I agree with you but you are not taking what I said in context.
I was replying to people who think they can buy a monitor right now and upgrade it later. There is no proof of concept with that.
 
mesyn191 said:
I don't think you're properly appreciating the difference $99 makes on a product that tends to run $300 for a "cheap" monitor. Look at all the crap people put up with trying save buying those Korean LCD's: janky construction, low-to-no support chain, extra special dead or stuck pixel panel lotto, etc.

For most a $99 price difference + vendor lock in will be a deal breaker for GSync. The PC gaming market is already pretty darn low volume and you need decent volume sales to take advantage of economy of scale and get those 50% or more price cuts. So that line of thought doesn't really seem to be panning out here.

For some reason you keep thinking FreeSync will be AMD only, why? If its built into the spec there is no reason NV can't or wouldn't be able to support it with a driver update so long as they eventually put out a DP1.2a/3 compatible GPU. Which they certainly will at some point, probably by late this year, certainly early next year.
Click to expand...

There are people on this forum that buy new monitors almost monthly. Many of the best monitors recommended are at least $500 , I doubt the individuals buying them would really fret about a $100 if it netted them a feature they wanted. People will happily pay over $1000 for an old but widely beloved Sony CRT as long as its in good condition simply for the benefits of CRT technology.

Both technologies work exclusively with their own cards so saying one is superior doesn't make sense at the moment because we still don't have Freesync out in the wild but we can hear opinions from G-sync users. Both require locked down technology which really is a loss for us consumers. Nvidia's is more expensive up front granted but it works and it works 100 percent of the time (for me , so far). I upgraded my ASUS monitor so I can actually speak from experience , I have yet to try a game that G-sync doesn't work in. Freesync is driver dependent so it could have a lot of up front incompatibility issues to deal with since its software based. This could end up being a nightmare for early adopters of Freesync. G-sync is however hardware based and it just "works". I've used three different drivers and none of them caused any weirdness with G-sync and when you consider G-sync is only available for one monitor right now and as an upgrade via DIY then that's pretty incredible considering the tiny fraction of users who currently have it. I can't even remember the last time a major feature for a PC product worked out of the box day one without a hiccup.

Neither of these technologies are really "free" as both required exclusive hardware setups to function. If you own AMD products then you should be excited frankly and if you own Nvidia products then you should also be pretty stoked. Both parties will get the technology but one solution will be superior to the other. Frankly I would rather pay extra and have technology functional out of the box without waiting months for drivers to finally smooth out. No offense to AMD but their driver team can take a VERY long time to iron out bugs. They are better these days but my 290's in Crossfire took a couple of months now to finally play nicely with the majority of my library. I can't even remember having any issues with my GTX 670's in SLI. But my experience is individual so I don't want what I'm saying to be taken in a broad sense.
 
Yea but those people are teeeeeny tiny niche of a niche of a niche of a niche. There is no volume there so you can't build a market off them. Again the volume is all with the cheap(er) stuff. Most people simply can't afford to spend $500+ on a monitor ever much less every other day.

How is a tech built into a widespread standard that NV and AMD and even Intel or VIA support or will support "locked in"? Even if only AMD supports it in the beginning it'd still be part of a broadly support spec that AMD doesn't even come close to controlling. Anyone else will be able to support it any time they like.

FreeSync is "free" in the sense it can or will leverage a open standard and you'll pay nothing extra for a monitor that will work with it. This is not a minor thing.

sharknice said:
I agree with you but you are not taking what I said in context.
I was replying to people who think they can buy a monitor right now and upgrade it later. There is no proof of concept with that.
Click to expand...
OK sorry.
 
Venomous said:
IF freesync does come out in a hurry by gaming monitor vendors, gsync will be in trouble if it provides the same solution for free.
Click to expand...

I think they are different solutions to the same problem; one solution which is hardware based and the other which is software based.

I'm excited to see the benchmarks when both are out on the market to get an idea on what the performance difference is.
 
From what I read, its not a software solution. They mentioned there would still be a 10 to 20$ extra hardware cost to build a freesync monitor but instead of an add on board or some extra controller like gsync, it's simply the cost to support the vblank vesa standard which allows to "flash" the backlight at a variable rate (or on demand I supose). I am guessing that in the real world it means whatever extra cost to have a display port connector (which is currently the only connection type supporting carrying the vblank signal) and wiring the backlight's control circuitry to a variable clock generator instead of a fixed one.

In other word, it's the same old monitor electronics that will now know to look for the vblank signal and use it to set the clock generator. Its not a software solution. Nothing is calculated on board, there should be no performance difference with gsync.

Come to think of it though, its more likely going to use some sort of "pulsed" controller for on demand back-light illumination rather than use a variable clock who's refresh rate is constantly modified. You get the idea.

I am very happy that AMD offers this for free to everyone. This technology has been developped a few years ago by the gaming community in the dark corners of a forum thread. The old way of doing it required a lightboost monitor and driver hack. See http://www.blurbusters.com/. As usual someone came along and ripped off the idea for cash.... we all know who this is. When you read who it is' reaction to freesync its quite obvious they are not happy. Especially that every radeon hd 7xxx and above allready supports it :) And ppl tought AMD was behind on this one :D (including me)

Thank you AMD!

I wonder what is going on with Nvidia... they are not doing too well this past few years. It must be the 3Dfx curse! :D
 
hd 7xxx support was just marketing bullshit you need 285, 290 or 290x (plus 2 or 3 low end models) to use variable refresh rate

Also I think you have something mixed - G-sync has variable refresh rate and can support ULMB which is official way of doing strobing (previous Lightboost hack)

Freesync is variable refresh rate for AMD cards - everything else is up to monitor electronics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top