GSYNC is dead [or is it?]

[boniek]

http://www.techpowerup.com/200741/vesa- ... ndard.html
I wonder if GSYNC monitors can be upgraded to Adaptive Sync standard.

[Black Octagon]

Well we haven't yet seen a proper comparison of the two technologies yet. Adaptive Sync monitors do not yet exist and G-Sync only just got started

Sent from dumbphone (pls excuse typos and dumbness)

[nimbulan]

While basic variable refresh rate support will show up in cheap displays in the near future, I would expect Adaptive Sync-capable, feature-rich gaming displays to take longer and be more expensive than current non-G-Sync gaming displays. In that time the cost of G-sync should also go down as they move away from the prototyping board and onto dedicated hardware so I would expect them to be similarly priced.

And this is still assuming that Adaptive Sync / FreeSync will have the same capabilities as G-Sync. Only time will tell.

[Chief Blur Buster]

While a positive development, the VESA standard wont be full 120Hz+ for a long time. The Adaptive Sync standard will usually vary only up to 60Hz due to existing limitations in existing chips. It would take two to three years for this to become competitive with GSYNC. Take the word from the display engineers. The VESA standard was originally for battery savings but has been co-opted for dynamic synchronization of refreshes to frames, for elimination if stutter/tearing. But the existing chips only go up to 60Hz, and there is currently no driver support yet.

Even NVIDIA had to do a FPGA in order to pull this off, in full HD resolution at 120Hz.

Give it time, but GSYNC currently has a huge head start despite the shipping delays.

[boniek]

I have read that fist monitors with Adaptive Sync are expected to show up in 6-12 months timeframe and AMD will be ready with appropriate drivers to support them. What I wonder is if Adaptive Sync will still have polling mechanism or some sort of completely asynchronous operation.
EDIT: http://techreport.com/news/26451/adapti ... yport-spec
FAQ by AMD in article. From this very faq there are ranges of supported refresh rates: 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz

[omgBlur]

Taken from a comment about the same article on reddit.

From what I've read free-sync doesn't use as much hardware as g-sync does, begging the question if its all software driven, basically an updated version of vsync for 1.2a monitors that are adjusted to the new software.
We will have to wait 5 or so months for AMD to demo us one and see how great it is.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong here as I don't know the specifics to this but, I think what most people aren't realizing here is that for monitor manufacturers to actually implement this new standard. It must come at a price. Probably not as much as G-Sync, but I'm guessing we'll have a similar type of price war like AMD vs Nvidia cards. (I.e if the ROG PG278Q goes for $800 then a FreeSync equivalent may go for $750).

I'm all up for competition as it makes stuff I like cheaper for me, but it's too early to make such claims.

[nimbulan]

From this very faq there are ranges of supported refresh rates: 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz

I find this very strange since G-sync is limited to 30 Hz to avoid flickering and inversion artifacts and those do start to appear to about 35 Hz. Going all the way down to 9 Hz sounds like a really bad idea.

[boniek]

From this very faq there are ranges of supported refresh rates: 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz

I find this very strange since G-sync is limited to 30 Hz to avoid flickering and inversion artifacts and those do start to appear to about 35 Hz. Going all the way down to 9 Hz sounds like a really bad idea.

I suppose this is what standard supports but specific values are implementation dependant.

[Sparky]

The hard part is and has always been getting the display manufacturers to implement it. If Nvidia is still using FPGAs in the new monitors, they'll probably be the first ones to support the adaptive sync standard.

[Edmond]

The more i search on this the more i keep bumping into something like -

Freesync guesses what hz the monitor should be.
Gsync lets the video card drive the monitor directly.

IF this is true, gsync is way more superior and is available a year or two in advance already. Freesync then seems worthless as it doesnt solve anything, just tries to implement some adaptive vsync into the monitor hardware. This seems really bad to me, its like if someone made a super crappy 50km range electric car two years from now and wanted it to compete with teslas cars from today.

And adaptivesync seems like another energy-saving bullshit taken from tablets and applied to pc monitors, that HAPPENS to allow variable hz. I like a desktop @ 120hz, tyvm, or even 60hz, def not 9hz .. wtf.