NVIDIA Adding 7 "G-Sync Compatible" Monitors to Its Listing on April 23rd

[TheGuruStud]

Fanboys don't work like that. They just rage on keywords

The confusion here is that while G-Sync will work on FreeSync capable monitors, Nvidia does not do FreeSync. FreeSync is something AMD has built on top of AdaptiveSync. FreeSync uses AdaptiveSync over DisplayPort and something else over HDMI. FreeSync is governed by AMD, AdaptiveSync is governed by VESA. It's pretty obvious why Nvidia doesn't go for a solution governed by their main competitor.

Fake news.

Nvidia desperately wants people to believe it, though.

 

[Mistral]

So basically nVidia will be "certifying" a few monitors now and again to get extra news entries and free promo for themselves. Got it. Not a bad plan.

 

[SoNic67]

My monitor (KG221Q) - that's why I've literally asked if nvidia would ever support freesync over HDMI, Some TV's also have freesync apparently but only have HDMI as well.

AMD literally spells out that it's DP technology. Only "the latest HDMI" will support it... which means even for them it was just an after thought.
https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/free-sync-faq

So basically nVidia will be "certifying" a few monitors now and again to get extra news entries and free promo for themselves. Got it. Not a bad plan.

Even AMD has a list of monitors: https://www.amd.com/en/products/freesync-monitors
Do they have a evil plan too? Or you can accept that some monitors are just marketing? Is 40-60 Hz "good enough"?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

AMD literally spells out that it's DP technology. Only "the latest HDMI" will support it... which means even for them it was just an after thought.
https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/free-sync-faq

More like HDMI Forum moves at a snail's pace. On the other hand, AMD carries a lot of weight at VESA. I suspect the only reason why HDMI Forum added VRR to 2.1 is because AMD was already doing it over HDMI 1.4 and newer.

Even AMD has a list of monitors: https://www.amd.com/en/products/freesync-monitors
Do they have a evil plan too? Or you can accept that some monitors are just marketing? Is 40-60 Hz "good enough"?

AMD doesn't put out a press release every time they update the list.

 

[bug]

Fake news.

Nvidia desperately wants people to believe it, though.

Could you point out which part of what I said is fake?

 

[newtekie1]

AMD doesn't put out a press release every time they update the list.

Yeah, but that's because it would just be a flood of press releases if they did since they slap the Freesync sticker on pretty much anything that has VRR and have no real other requirements. Monitor can only go between 50 and 60Hz? FreeSync!

 

[SoNic67]

More like HDMI Forum moves at a snail's pace. On the other hand, AMD carries a lot of weight at VESA. I suspect the only reason why HDMI Forum added VRR to 2.1 is because AMD was already doing it over HDMI 1.4 and newer.

It might be. But HDMI is more of a consumer-apliances oriented connection, adding it to PC's video cards was a stop-gap measure, cost-conscious, until DP matured.
That's why HDMI is still present on gaming cards, but is not present on professional ones. DP has specific features for computer usage, while HDMI has for TV/Audio devices control.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Yeah, but that's because it would just be a flood of press releases if they did since they slap the Freesync sticker on pretty much anything that has VRR and have not real other requirements. Monitor can only go between 50 and 60Hz? FreeSync!

Better than static 60 Hz.

 

[SoNic67]

Haha, based on that 59-60 Hz is "FreeSync" too

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Yes, yes it is. FreeSync certification simply means it works as advertised. There's no requirements for range other than it have one and it works. If you're looking for good FreeSync monitors, look for FreeSync 2 HDR certified.

The only reason why NVIDIA doesn't certify monitors like AMD is because they invested a lot of money into building G-Sync as a premium brand. FreeSync, on the other hand, is just a VRR implementation trademark.

 

[newtekie1]

Better than static 60 Hz.

I'll take static 60 with fast sync over 50-60Hz Freesync anyday.

Yes, yes it is. FreeSync certification simply means it works as advertised. There's requirements for range other than it have one and it works. If you're looking for good FreeSync monitors, look for FreeSync 2 HDR certified.

The only reason why NVIDIA doesn't certify monitors like AMD is because they invested a lot of money into building G-Sync as a premium brand. FreeSync, on the other hand, is just a VRR implementation trademark.

And yet people will still say Freesync is just as good a G-Sync...

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I'll take static 60 with fast sync over 50-60Hz Freesync anyday.

Enhanced Sync (AMD's answer to Fast Sync) can be used regardless of static or FreeSync. There's literally no disadvantage of a FreeSync display compared to one that isn't.

And yet people will still say Freesync is just as good a G-Sync...

FreeSync 2 HDR is. Better, even because there's only the limitations of the panel and the graphics card. A lot of high end G-Sync panels run into limitations of the G-Sync module.

 

[robb]

There is a Freesync monitor without DP? I don't know any.
As for VGA... Let's not talk about analog dinosaurs now. Certainly VGA can't support any sync variation to this level.

You sure have not be paying attention as there are plenty of cheap freesync monitors that do not have displayport.

 

[bogami]

G Sync is one of the best methods of manipulation and sand in the eye to users, where half the GPU power is achieved almost the same as if you ad next GPU. A tering can not be eliminated, and , the bugs are visible. This is already at 60 Hz and for normal people this is the operating frequency of the monitor. To support this kind of manipulation is expensive and they sell it to us like this. Support is a free accessibility and here is added another GPU card in the second name. Every honor to AMD Radeon, which has ethical standards, Just look at the calculating power of their products and you can clearly see how much cheating is here.

 

[robb]

G Sync is one of the best methods of manipulation and sand in the eye to users, where half the GPU power is achieved almost the same as if you ad next GPU. A tering can not be eliminated, and , the bugs are visible. This is already at 60 Hz and for normal people this is the operating frequency of the monitor. To support this kind of manipulation is expensive and they sell it to us like this. Support is a free accessibility and here is added another GPU card in the second name. Every honor to AMD Radeon, which has ethical standards, Just look at the calculating power of their products and you can clearly see how much cheating is here.

please run that gibberish through the translator one more time...

 

[newtekie1]

Enhanced Sync (AMD's answer to Fast Sync) can be used regardless of static or FreeSync. There's literally no disadvantage of a FreeSync display compared to one that isn't.

Other than they'll slap that sticker on the box, up the price $25-50, and it gives no real benefit at all. I'm not saying FreeSync doesn't give a benefit on a good monitor, but on a crappy one that has a stupidly small VRR range, it gives no real noticeable benefit. They are just slapping the sticker on there so they can up the price.

FreeSync 2 HDR is. Better, even because there's only the limitations of the panel and the graphics card. A lot of high end G-Sync panels run into limitations of the G-Sync module.

I wouldn't say that even. If how FreeSync was handle is any indication of how FreeSync 2 will be, then FreeSync 2 could still have limitations. I mean, there are 144Hz panels, that are marketed as FreeSync, from reputable companies, that burry the fact that FreeSync will only work at 35-90Hz. So enabling FreeSync on your nice 144Hz gaming monitor, suddenly limits that monitor to 90Hz for no reason other than because FreeSync...

So, yeah, in theory FreeSync and FreeSync 2 shouldn't have a limit, but obviously in practice it can, often does.

 

[Mussels]

While i'm glad nvidia has done this, what i dont get is how freesync can work on the monitors without artifacting and issues, but nvidia cant.

Why cant Nv hardware run the same as AMD's, even if it needs a displayport firmware update like they did a few months back

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Other than they'll slap that sticker on the box, up the price $25-50, and it gives no real benefit at all.

That's their decision. FreeSync is free.

If how FreeSync was handle is any indication of how FreeSync 2 will be, then FreeSync 2 could still have limitations.

Uh? They're already out. See the list and check the FreeSync 2 box. FreeSync 2 requires HDR (either DisplayHDR 600 or a similar definition that predates DisplayHDR), LFC (max must be at least 2.5x min), and low latency.

While i'm glad nvidia has done this, what i dont get is how freesync can work on the monitors without artifacting and issues, but nvidia cant.

Why cant Nv hardware run the same as AMD's, even if it needs a displayport firmware update like they did a few months back

This is why AMD created FreeSync. It was clear early on that doing variable refresh rate wasn't a one-size-catches-all thing. Drivers have to be updated to make VRR monitors work as intended with specific tweaks on a per monitor basis. That's why FreeSync monitors aren't plug and play on NVIDIA hardware: NVIDIA lacks the tweaks AMD did.

 

[John Naylor]

It would be worth mentioning if any of them also support any MBR technology. To my eyes, getting adaptive sync w/o MBR is like getting a beer with 0% alcohol content.

Watching my son's (23-29) ... they all play w/ G-Sync switched off in 144 / 165 hz IPS 1440p screens in 9 outta every 10 games. Most of the folks we've built for report the same. Only when they drop below around 75 hz do the turn ULMB off and use G-Sync. I do the same and, but at 1080p, I can get away with using MBR on everything.

 

[bug]

Yes, yes it is. FreeSync certification simply means it works as advertised. There's requirements for range other than it have one and it works. If you're looking for good FreeSync monitors, look for FreeSync 2 HDR certified.

The only reason why NVIDIA doesn't certify monitors like AMD is because they invested a lot of money into building G-Sync as a premium brand. FreeSync, on the other hand, is just a VRR implementation trademark.

Actually, no there isn't. Afaik, this is the crux of Nvidia's having to certify monitors one by one: where G-Sync had strict requirements for supported frequencies, FreeSync didn't. SO there are monitors out there which can do FreeSync, but they don't actually look any better than plain old FreeSync.

See: https://www.displayninja.com/freesync-monitor-list/
Many monitors sport 40-60 or 48-75Hz range.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

That was a typo. Should be "there's no requirements for range."