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
I believe my point still stands: if it's not a bottom-of-the-barrel 6-bit+dithering or with a horrible black point monitor, it almost certainly qualifies for DisplayHDR 400.
I'm not saying DisplayHDR 400 isn't a minor improvement over SDR because it is minor. The point is certified DisplayHDR 400 displays should have better picture quality than non-certified panels.
Measured peak brightness 450cd/sq m. It just fails in the contrast department because instead of 950:1 if only does 900:1.
Edit: HDR 400 is meant for OLED which can't shine as bright and maybe laptops where you don't want to kill the battery. HDR 400 on desktop monitors is outright dishonest.
1) Stop calling DisplayHDR 400 standard HDR 400
2) Spreading misinformation