Nvidia fires back regarding AMD's FreeSync technology demo

[Shawn Knight]

Hot off the heels of Nvidia’s G-Sync announcement late last year, AMD came to the Consumer Electronics Show with a variable refresh rate technology of their own. Known as FreeSync, the Nvidia alternative aims to essentially do the same thing as G-Sync but without requiring extra hardware.

Oh, and they want to make it free for all users. What’s not to like about that?

The gang over at The Tech Report must have though the same so they headed over to Nvidia’s booth at CES for a sit-down with Tom Petersen, the executive behind the development of G-Sync technology. While Petersen said he was excited to see competitors taking an interest in dynamic refresh rates, it is important to point out that AMD’s demo was running on laptops.

As he explained, laptops have a different display architecture compared to desktops. Broken down further, they have a more direct interface between the GPU and the LCD panel and are typically based on standards like LVDS or eDP (embedded DisplayPort). Desktops, on the other hand, typically use HDMI and DisplayPort and usually have a scalar chip positioned between the GPU and the display.

Because of this, it’s nearly impossible to implement variable refresh on a desktop monitor at present.

It’s the reason why Nvidia created the G-Sync module – to replace the scalar ASIC with logic of their own creation. To the best of his knowledge, there exists no scalar ASIC with variable refresh capability. If it existed, Nvidia would know, he said.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/55274-nvidia-fires-back-regarding-amds-freesync-technology-demo.html

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Ok, so AMD's free G-sync tech only works on laptops... that's still great isn't it?

Oh, and maybe someone can answer this for me. I don't really know what DisplayPort is... I haven't built a PC in a while and I still think of DVI and HDMI as being the main interfaces. If DisplayPort is new, why didn't they build in dynamic refresh like they have in laptop interfaces?

 

[treeski]

Ok, so AMD's free G-sync tech only works on laptops... that's still great isn't it?

Oh, and maybe someone can answer this for me. I don't really know what DisplayPort is... I haven't built a PC in a while and I still think of DVI and HDMI as being the main interfaces. If DisplayPort is new, why didn't they build in dynamic refresh like they have in laptop interfaces?

Original version of displayport was developed in 2006, and the current version has been around since 2009. I believe Apple and Dell have been using it the longest, but these days it's quickly replacing DVI from what I've seen.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Display port also allows a daisy chain of monitor from one port. Each device has a input and output for creating the chain.

The new DisplayPort v1.2 daisy chainable displays have both a DisplayPort input and a DisplayPort output. The DisplayPort output connects to the next downstream display.

 

[m4a4]

Well then, no excuses, get "g-sync" drivers out for laptops Nvidia!

 

[amstech]

Nvidia is always a step ahead of AMD so I knew there would be a catch. Sorry AMD but no clock speed adjustments will save you here.

 

[treeski]

Nvidia is always a step ahead of AMD so I knew there would be a catch. Sorry AMD but no clock speed adjustments will save you here.

Sure, but Nvidia doesn't provide any argument for using their technology on laptops.

 

[Duskywolf50]

Yes, Nivida did ahead of AMD but if AMD do not bring this up then Nivida will charge you more money for this technology so they poke Nivida. You should thank AMD.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Could be from nVidia point of view, they really don't care about AMD's technology on laptops.

 

[GhostRyder]

Sounds like Nvidia is mad at AMD for making a free version and trying to spite AMD for stealing the spotlight. I can see the fanboy patrol is on the hunt above trying to make the tech sound bad so they can justify 600+ dollars for a tech AMD is offering for free.

Then again, we just have to wait for the response, its just a back and forth war at this point between the companies.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Seriously @GhostRyder nVidia didn't come forward with an attack, someone went to their booth and ask them questions. nVidia was answering the questions that were ask of them on their own ground. nVidia has nothing to be mad at.

 

[GhostRyder]

Seriously @GhostRyder nVidia didn't come forward with an attack, someone went to their booth and ask them questions. nVidia was answering the questions that were ask of them on their own ground. nVidia has nothing to be mad at.

Didn't say it was an attack, merely they made a smite at the tech shown by AMD because they wanted their tech to sound better. Both companies are playing this game right now where one says one thing then the other smacks the other with an "Answer to a question" by stating their tech is designed to be the real deal or better or whatever. This is just another one of those instances and the constant harass will go back and forth.

Just the laws of Computer Companies in this day and age.

 

[Guest]

Yay.... now I'm worried that each company develops their own proprietary tech and you'll either have a monitor that supports one or the other...

whont that make switching graphics cards a pain because you'll have to change not only the card but the display as well if you are "changing sides"??

 

[oldikes]

Nvidia is always a step ahead of AMD so I knew there would be a catch. Sorry AMD but no clock speed adjustments will save you here.

So wait. AMD releases a free alternative to gysnc, but apparently (according to the COMPETITOR, whos trying to commercialize this type of tech, instead of give it out for free) right now it only works on laptops.
Nvidia has no gysnc for laptops. Their gysnc desktop monitors cost hundreds of dollars more than normal monitors. This makes me think it would be cheaper to implement AMD's tech into monitors than it is to do so with gysnc. But Nvidia is still a step ahead and vastly superior.

I can imagine it now. AMD gives out free HD7870s that only work on windows. nvidia charges you at least $300 for a GTX 770. But Nvidia is clearly the better company because the product is better and it works in MOAR SITUATIONS, even though it costs a fortune and someone else is giving you a still fantastic product for no real direct gain to them.

Hey im not hating on Nvidia, ive got one of their cards in my build. But blind fanboyism scares me. AMD is trying to do something FREE and nice for computer users (and they have, and they will keep trying) and you still try to justify nvidea's blatant attempts to make some quick green.

 

[cliffordcooley]

If they honestly wanted to find a solution, they would implement a cable that allows better communication between the GPU and monitor. In my opinion; trying to implement GSync (because it is proprietary) or FreeSync over current cabling is a dead-end.

 

[SparkMasterB]

The edge AMD has here is display manufacturers are more likely to incorporated the variable refresh rate standard into ALL monitors, and not just nvidia exclusive monitors. More potential customers, more likely to have broader support.

 

[cliffordcooley]

The edge AMD has here is display manufacturers are more likely to incorporated the variable refresh rate standard into ALL monitors

nVidia plainly stated was not possible with current cable standards.

When I first saw AMD's demonstration, I was wondering why they were using laptops. After reading nVidia's comment, using laptops was the only way AMD could demonstrate their FreeSync. Neither GSync or FreeSync will work with the majority of desktop hardware. So all in all, neither one has a leg up on the other.

 

[Jad Chaar]

Nvidia is always a step ahead of AMD so I knew there would be a catch. Sorry AMD but no clock speed adjustments will save you here.

I am not hating, but this is basically what you are saying xD: "OMG it doesnt have an nVidia logo on it, it must be bad!"

 

[GhostRyder]

So wait. AMD releases a free alternative to gysnc, but apparently (according to the COMPETITOR, whos trying to commercialize this type of tech, instead of give it out for free) right now it only works on laptops.
Nvidia has no gysnc for laptops. Their gysnc desktop monitors cost hundreds of dollars more than normal monitors. This makes me think it would be cheaper to implement AMD's tech into monitors than it is to do so with gysnc. But Nvidia is still a step ahead and vastly superior.

I can imagine it now. AMD gives out free HD7870s that only work on windows. nvidia charges you at least $300 for a GTX 770. But Nvidia is clearly the better company because the product is better and it works in MOAR SITUATIONS, even though it costs a fortune and someone else is giving you a still fantastic product for no real direct gain to them.

Hey im not hating on Nvidia, ive got one of their cards in my build. But blind fanboyism scares me. AMD is trying to do something FREE and nice for computer users (and they have, and they will keep trying) and you still try to justify nvidea's blatant attempts to make some quick green.

@ikesmasher Pushes the like button...

nVidia plainly stated was not possible with current cable standards.

When I first saw AMD's demonstration, I was wondering why they were using laptops. After reading nVidia's comment, using laptops was the only way AMD could demonstrate their FreeSync. Neither GSync or FreeSync will work with the majority of desktop hardware. So all in all, neither one has a leg up on the other.

They just picked up some laptops at retail to show this off on s othey could try to show this in the least biased way possible. I mean we have to wait and see if this is true or not, it could be just a Nvidia guy saying something quickly to counter AMD.

I am not hating, but this is basically what you are saying xD: "OMG it doesnt have an nVidia logo on it, it must be bad!"

Is there anything beyond like I can push for this comment @JC713

 

[amstech]

Nvidia has no gysnc for laptops. Their gysnc desktop monitors cost hundreds of dollars more than normal monitors. This makes me think it would be cheaper to implement AMD's tech into monitors than it is to do so with gysnc. But Nvidia is still a step ahead and vastly superior..

It's cheaper because its not as good. Its second rate knee-jerk technology in response to Gsync, which is proven to be unmatched and work good. Gsync monitors are more expensive because the technology is better then any competition and its still quite new, you want the best you gotta pay for it. Nvidia is always one step ahead and has been for years. This truth makes me a fanboy? Hahaha, so be it.

 

[oldikes]

It's cheaper because its not as good. Its second rate knee-jerk technology in response to Gsync, which is proven to be unmatched and work good. Gsync monitors are more expensive because the technology is better then any competition and its still quite new. Nvidia is always one step ahead and has been for years. The truth makes me a fanboy? Lol, so be it.

There isnt any competition. This technology was announced yesterday when gysnc was announced MONTHS ago. No one except AMD knows the potential of it or how well it actually works-including you (and yes, me.) Theres a difference between the truth and trying to predict the future.

 

[amstech]

There isnt any competition. This technology was announced yesterday when gysnc was announced MONTHS ago.

So, that makes AMD several months late to the table with their knee-jerk version. In America, we call this being 'one step behind'.
I believe someone called me a fanboy for saying that? How does it feel to eat your words?

Theres a difference between the truth and trying to predict the future.

The truth is that Nvidia's tech works (now, not after testing, it works NOW) and the only word you can use to describe AMD's reactionary technology is 'it has potential'.

Nvidia isn’t the only company who plans to release monitors with their G-Sync technology either. Also on the list are Acer, AOC, ASUS, BEnQ, Philips, and ViewSonic. So all in all a pretty hefty corner of the computer monitor market will be boasting this new next-gen tech. G-Sync monitors will be available in 24 inch and 27 inch sizes.
Read more at http://gamingbolt.com/nvidia-g-sync-integrated-monitors-announced-for-q2-2014#rS3QHxOmZcXHxEJ7.99

I didn't need anymore information to support my claims but thanks, keep talking!

 

[oldikes]

So, that makes AMD several months late to the table with their knee-jerk version. In America, we call this being 'one step behind'.
I believe someone called me a fanboy for saying that? How does it feel to eat your words?

The truth is that Nvidia's tech works (now, not after testing, it works NOW) and the only word you can use to describe AMD's reactionary technology is 'it has potential'.

I didn't need anymore information to support my claims but thanks, keep talking!

You look at this like its competition; when in reality it is generosity vs greed. According to AMD, this tech works without incorporating a 200 dollar chip into the monitor. Apparently you don't like being told that your favorite company isnt perfect so im done arguing here.

 

[cliffordcooley]

You look at this like its competition; when in reality it is generosity vs greed.

You have got to be joking. The only thing AMD has out has already been paid for. They just want you to think it is a free feature.

 

[oldikes]

The only thing AMD has out has already been paid for.

Please explain.