When is the first freesync monitor hitting the market?

tybert7

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
2,763
A lot of companies have announced releases, or upgrades to existing monitors, but which monitor is going to be the first shipping display that supports freesync?
 
there is an Asus MG279Q - 1440p 120hz IPS A-sync coming, so far it appears to be the best one.
 
1440p version isn't freesync compatible if I remember correctly.

I stand corrected. Well, all of January has past, and all of February, now we're into March. I wish these display makers would hurry up so we can get some tests done.
 



May be a huge red flag with this monitor.

http://gaming.benq.com/gaming-monitor/xl2730z/specification/


look at the vertical/horizontal refresh ranges.

vga/hdmi = 24Hz-120Hz

dual link dvi / Displayport = 56Hz-144Hz


.... am I reading this wrong or did they make a mistake? Does that mean freesync won't kick in until the monitors has a framerate of at least 56Hz ???

going down to 40 is tolerable, 30Hz even better, but 56Hz? wtf is the point? Please someone tell me I am missing something basic. If not this benq should be avoided like the plague if you intend to use it as a freesync monitor.
 
That does seem a bit odd.

us is only 1440p, so HDMI would still be fine.
 
That does seem a bit odd.

us is only 1440p, so HDMI would still be fine.

I thought adaptive sync was part of the displayport 1.2a spec though, so I'm assuming that won't even work over vga/hdmi/dvi.


Also, don't you need hdmi 2.0 to drive content over 1440p displays at 120Hz? None of the current amd cards that use freesync have that yet. The 380/390 probably will, but that's not here yet, even if it did support freesync.


Until this monitors performance is fleshed out, I don't think ANYONE looking to get an early freesync display should buy this. If freesync really is only usable from 56Hz to 144Hz, there is no point buying it.
 
I thought adaptive sync was part of the displayport 1.2a spec though, so I'm assuming that won't even work over vga/hdmi/dvi.


Also, don't you need hdmi 2.0 to drive content over 1440p displays at 120Hz? None of the current amd cards that use freesync have that yet. The 380/390 probably will, but that's not here yet, even if it did support freesync.


Until this monitors performance is fleshed out, I don't think ANYONE looking to get an early freesync display should buy this. If freesync really is only usable from 56Hz to 144Hz, there is no point buying it.

The frequency is dictated by the monitor. Freesync can go much lower. If it's limited to 56Hz on this monitor then that's because the monitor can't go lower without needing to refresh the pixels and you'd get flicker.

The Swift reportedly flickers below 40Hz, for example.
 
The frequency is dictated by the monitor. Freesync can go much lower. If it's limited to 56Hz on this monitor then that's because the monitor can't go lower without needing to refresh the pixels and you'd get flicker.

The Swift reportedly flickers below 40Hz, for example.

the limitation is with the monitor. Technically adaptive-sync could cover a host of ranges with ease starting from 1 (one) if need be now that one waits for the other. The old way had no waiting, either it was ready or not.
 
How does something like this get released without a single review :confused:

I read somewhere that the freesync drivers won't be released to the public until the 19th of this month. If that's correct they may just be waiting until those launch to test that functionality, and perhaps a more general review would want to touch on those aspects in addition to the rest of the panel so they may as well wait.
 
I read somewhere that the freesync drivers won't be released to the public until the 19th of this month. If that's correct they may just be waiting until those launch to test that functionality, and perhaps a more general review would want to touch on those aspects in addition to the rest of the panel so they may as well wait.

So, do you think AMD doesn't have working drivers in house yet? I find that hard to believe. I keep watching what AMD does to see if they're going to turn the corner marketing wise, but something like this makes me think that they aren't yet. I know AMD doesn't make or market the monitors, but I would have to think that the monitor manufacturers would want to make as big of a splash as possible when releasing a new product and have AMD be on board with the release.

There were reviewers swooning and drooling all over Gsync monitors months before they were released to the public. Here we've got the monitor being sold and not even one single review. It makes no sense. AMD keeps getting new CEO's but little changes, it seems. It's frustrating!
 
So, do you think AMD doesn't have working drivers in house yet? I find that hard to believe. I keep watching what AMD does to see if they're going to turn the corner marketing wise, but something like this makes me think that they aren't yet. I know AMD doesn't make or market the monitors, but I would have to think that the monitor manufacturers would want to make as big of a splash as possible when releasing a new product and have AMD be on board with the release.

There were reviewers swooning and drooling all over Gsync monitors months before they were released to the public. Here we've got the monitor being sold and not even one single review. It makes no sense. AMD keeps getting new CEO's but little changes, it seems. It's frustrating!

I'm sure they have working drivers. The reasons to hold off before releasing them to the general public could potentially be wanting more time to work out any bugs or glitches so the experience works as smoothly as possible. But this is all speculation. I agree this should already be out though. Both the monitors should be out and the drivers and reviews.
 
And the funny thing is AMD annouced freesync drivers few months ago

http://techreport.com/review/27481/catalyst-omega-driver-adds-more-than-20-features-400-bug-fixes

Support for new hardware. This driver is the first one with support for FreeSync, AMD's alternative to G-Sync. Both G-Sync and FreeSync are designed to smooth game animation by making the display's refresh rate match the in-game frame rate. AMD tells us FreeSync monitors are currently in mass production, and the displays are being validated with the Catalyst Omega driver. Expect FreeSync monitors to show up in stores in January or February.
 
I'm sure they have working drivers. The reasons to hold off before releasing them to the general public could potentially be wanting more time to work out any bugs or glitches so the experience works as smoothly as possible. But this is all speculation. I agree this should already be out though. Both the monitors should be out and the drivers and reviews.

Even if they don't want to release them to the GP yet, at least have reviews.
 
We can all wait a few more days, if this gets good reviews ima buy one right away, have wanted to buy a Rog swift because I want a 1440p monitor and 144hz but didn't want to pay extra for G Sync module since I don't have nvidia nor do I plan to upgrade and my Asus vg248qe has given me problems in the past so I wouldn't mind trying a different brand. Don't really ever get screen tearing tho, only game I got screen tearing on was tomb raider and that was years ago.
 
Per AMD the monitor manufactuers jumped the gun.

They weren't supposed to release until March 19th, but some decided not to wait.

Since the public drivers arent available till the 19th, there isnt anything to review.
 
The thing with Freesync is that you need to check what the monitor frame range is allowing to work on some monitors can go low but if you get one that is rated between 40 and 60 might not be the best experience.

The "Freesync" "sticker" does not work wonders.
 
Last edited:
Hothardware had the first FreeSync monitor review up today, sadly the monitor had a sync range of 48 to 75hz only.

Follow the link for the review:
http://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-freesync-and-lg-34um67-widescreen-monitor-review


Adding a small excerpt:

the LG 34UM67—didn’t wow us like some other monitors we have evaluated lately due to its relatively low pixel density, limited dynamic refresh rate range (48-75Hz), and a few other minor quibbles, but at $649 for 34” of real estate, an IPS panel, and FreeSync support, we can’t really complain. The LG 34UM67’s 2560x1080 resolution is also “low enough” that you won’t need monstrous amounts of GPU horsepower to game smoothly at its native resolution.
Read more at http://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-...een-monitor-review?page=7#7G5vrChLIsYcGPdi.99
 
Last edited:
ASUS MG279Q (1440p)

do you mean 1080p specifically? or just 16:9?
 
The dynamic range depends on the manufacturer, it indeed can go as low as 30 and even lower:

http://www.vrworld.com/2014/05/12/vesa-adds-adaptive-sync-displayport-1-2-standard/

Q: What is the supported range of refresh rates with FreeSync and DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync?
A: AMD Radeon™ graphics cards will support a wide variety of dynamic refresh ranges with Project FreeSync. Using DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync, the graphics card can detect and set an appropriate maximum and minimum refresh rate based on the capabilities reported by the display. Potential ranges include 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz.


LG just choose poorly IMHO.
 
its less about the IHV, and more about the panels itself.

All the fancy hardware in the world wont fix a panel with crummy response times.
 
Nobody else would find a giant red stripe under their panel incredibly distracting? Gotta bust out the electrical tape on that.
 
Hothardware had the first FreeSync monitor review up today, sadly the monitor had a sync range of 48 to 75hz only.

Follow the link for the review:
http://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-freesync-and-lg-34um67-widescreen-monitor-review


Adding a small excerpt:

the LG 34UM67—didn’t wow us like some other monitors we have evaluated lately due to its relatively low pixel density, limited dynamic refresh rate range (48-75Hz), and a few other minor quibbles, but at $649 for 34” of real estate, an IPS panel, and FreeSync support, we can’t really complain. The LG 34UM67’s 2560x1080 resolution is also “low enough” that you won’t need monstrous amounts of GPU horsepower to game smoothly at its native resolution.
Read more at http://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-...een-monitor-review?page=7#7G5vrChLIsYcGPdi.99

Why in dog's name would you get a 34" monitor that is only 1080?
 
Why in dog's name would you get a 34" monitor that is only 1080?

You would use it more like a TV than a monitor, in any case look at the even weirder aspect ratio, being ultra wide i guess that 34" (or the 29" model) aren't as big as one would usually expect.

Still, seeing the Blue Ray test, that aspect ratio seems really weird...
 
yeah, if they dont get it down to 30, its pretty pointless.

Agreed. Just being able to use the monitor with a variable refresh rate does not matter if the minimum refresh levels are so high you gain no real benefits. We need to focus attention on any panels that go down to 30Hz (are there any so far?).


On a side note, the amd hating nvidia fanboys over on pcper are working overtime to make a case that gsync is superior.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Displa...hnical-Discussion/Inside-and-Outside-VRR-Wind

They really want to find a way to justify the extra money they have or are going to spend on the nvidia side.
 
The new BenQ XL2730Z has a range of 40-144Hz i just bought one, thats a huge range, i dont see needing anything below 60 anyways.. 40 is very low.
 
Back
Top