Wednesday, June 27th 2018
AMD Comments on FreeSync 2 HDR Controversy
AMD earlier this month announced that it is simply renaming its new FreeSync 2 standard as FreeSync 2 HDR, since it already incorporates hardware HDR, even though HDR is but one among many new features introduced with FreeSync 2. This caused some controversy as some FreeSync 2-certified monitors, which could now be plastered with FreeSync 2 HDR stickers, barely meet VESA's DisplayHDR 400 standards. AMD released a detailed statement to TechPowerUp, in which it clarified that FreeSync 2 HDR in no way lowers the bar for HDR, and that its certification program is both separate from and predates VESA DisplayHDR standards.
Essentially, AMD claims that all FreeSync 2 HDR-certified displays exceed DisplayHDR 400 requirements, but not all meet the DisplayHDR 600 minimums. In such cases, monitor manufacturers may stick both DisplayHDR 400 and AMD FreeSync 2 HDR logos in their specs-sheets or the product itself, but that doesn't mean that their monitors can only put out 400 nits brightness. The statement follows.
Essentially, AMD claims that all FreeSync 2 HDR-certified displays exceed DisplayHDR 400 requirements, but not all meet the DisplayHDR 600 minimums. In such cases, monitor manufacturers may stick both DisplayHDR 400 and AMD FreeSync 2 HDR logos in their specs-sheets or the product itself, but that doesn't mean that their monitors can only put out 400 nits brightness. The statement follows.
The FreeSync 2 (now FreeSync 2 HDR) specifications were set almost a year before the VESA DisplayHDR standards were published. These two programs are separate and independent from each other.
When DisplayHDR 400 was defined, it was clear from the start that the FreeSync 2 requirements for color gamut, max brightness and contrast ratio set a higher bar than DisplayHDR 400. AMD is not lowering the bar for FreeSync 2 HDR to align with DisplayHDR 400. We're clarifying that a display that meets the requirements for DisplayHDR 600, or higher, could meet the color gamut, max brightness and contrast ratio requirements of FreeSync 2 HDR. FreeSync 2 HDR also has additional requirements for gaming and usability in areas not covered by VESA's DisplayHDR specifications.
We want to ensure at least 2x the perceivable color gamut and dynamic range than an SDR display as we stated from the initial announcement of the FreeSync 2 program. DisplayHDR 600 minimum specifications align with this objective, DisplayHDR 400 minimum specifications do not.
It is possible for a display to meet the FreeSync 2 HDR requirements but fail the DisplayHDR 600 minimums. Such a display may have the DIsplayHDR 400 logo and the FreeSync 2 HDR logo, but it would be exceeding the minimum requirements of DisplayHDR 400.
34 Comments on AMD Comments on FreeSync 2 HDR Controversy
Joking aside I rather they start charging at least it would keep a tighter control on this. As opposed to G-Sync, Freesync may vary from panel to panel, so mostly it's based on luck.
VESA certified for HDRxxx
While there are over lap on requirements it is not completely. What they are saying is AMD Free Sync spec requirement for color gamut, max brightness and contrast ratio is higher then the VESA HDR400 requirements but lower then VESA HDR600. AMD is certifying products base on the requirements that was approved in there free-sync spec and is not looking at anything VESA is doing in there own certification process.
Therefore it possible a monitor can have FreeSync 2 HDR and HDR400.
You (manufacturer) are however not allowed to "upgrade" the FS2 badge to FS2 HDR by yourself.
So in short -- look for FS2 HDR and not FS2.
@PrEzi: @cyrand's post has it right.
Suddenly we care about Monitors misleading about it, wow.As calculated by well known all encompassing experts, such as south eastern part of Mr Gasaraki's body.Why on Earth?
FS 2 is about several things, ONE OF THEM HDR and not simply passing it over, but pre-calculating stuff in GPU, to reduce lag.
HDR and DisplayHDR XXX are not the same thing.
HDR and Ultra HD Premium are not the same thing.
Heck, and what is the deal with "barely meet VESA's DisplayHDR 400 standards"? There are many monitors out there which don't, pretty cool if FS2 mandates specs that are at least above DisplayHDR 400.
Looks like someone is creating "controversy" out of nothing.
FreeSync 2 HDR is literally just a rebrand of FreeSync 2 (took a while for that to click). FreeSync 2's HDR requirements land between DisplayHDR 400 and Display HDR 600. All FreeSync 2 (HDR) panels will exceed DisplayHDR 400 but not all will exceed DisplayHDR 600; ergo, all FreeSync 2 HDR displays at least qualify for DisplayHDR 400 but some may qualify for DisplayHDR 600 branding.
I thought AMD's intent with FreeSync 2 HDR was to align FreeSync 2 with DisplayHDR 600. I was wrong.
Personally, I think DisplayHDR 600 is the minimum required for a proper HDR experience. But since you can count the DisplayHDR 600 certified monitors on the finger on one hand, I can understand why FreeSync 2 specs were set below that. Still, it means they lowered the bar (i.e. compromised user experience) in order to get their sticker on something.
When you see "GSync HDR" what does it tell you in terms of "DisplayHDR" certification?
AMD's adding of "HDR" to FreeSync solves their problem of customers misreading "GSync HDR" vs "FreeSync 2" as "oh, the latter doesn't support HDR", when, in fact, HDR support is one of it's major features.
It doesn't mislead anyone who wasn't already mislead.HDR literally means "high dynamic range" it is not a certification, you can write it down and slap it on your car, if you wish.
Nearly all "HDR" TVs without Premium UHD certification hardly produce anything beyond SDR gamut.