• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

[Petition] Nvidia should support VESA Adaptive-Sync / FreeSync

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
It would help if you mentioned why you are against it so those that may come in here to vote understand both sides of the story...
 

wagex

Chapstick Eating Premium Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2011
signed! i dont understand why anyone would be against it. its a cheaper alternative than a gsync monitor and it would probably end up with more sales for nvidia.
 

Zantal

Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2009
Because G-sync has some sort of quality check, you have to specifically tune the chip to make it work on a monitor.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...-is-superior-to-amds-freesync/2/#19e8cda7f2b3

Now we could argue all day long why these reasons might be biased (coming from a nvidia employee)

But Nvidia wanted to have the best quality possible, and it just isn't possible without a dedicated chip on the monitor or fine tuning for every display anyway.
Tom's hardware even performed a blind test
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-freesync-versus-nvidia-g-sync-reader-event,4246.html

It is more expensive, but as the market has already shown us these g-sync monitors do sell a lot and the reason behind that is that most reviews pointed out the flaws in freesync and g-sync and the consumers decided to go with the better most expensive solution after all.

Now slightly off topic.

I think the petition is pointless, at this stage NVidia will never change it's course of action.
And I am getting tired of all these petitions like nvidia should adopt MANTLE, nvidia should adopt adaptive-sync, nvidia should stop being a **** to amd with gameworks.

AMD is not the good guy, nor is nvidia the bad guy here.
 

wagex

Chapstick Eating Premium Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2011
Because G-sync has some sort of quality check, you have to specifically tune the chip to make it work on a monitor.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...-is-superior-to-amds-freesync/2/#19e8cda7f2b3

Now we could argue all day long why these reasons might be biased (coming from a nvidia employee)

But Nvidia wanted to have the best quality possible, and it just isn't possible without a dedicated chip on the monitor or fine tuning for every display anyway.
Tom's hardware even performed a blind test
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-freesync-versus-nvidia-g-sync-reader-event,4246.html

It is more expensive, but as the market has already shown us these g-sync monitors do sell a lot and the reason behind that is that most reviews pointed out the flaws in freesync and g-sync and the consumers decided to go with the better most expensive solution after all.

Now slightly off topic.

I think the petition is pointless, at this stage NVidia will never change it's course of action.
And I am getting tired of all these petitions like nvidia should adopt MANTLE, nvidia should adopt adaptive-sync, nvidia should stop being a **** to amd with gameworks.

AMD is not the good guy, nor is nvidia the bad guy here.

who cares if g-sync is better. giving the consumers a choice of which to use i think is more of the issue.
the best quality possible excuse is bologna considering their drivers lately.
if people had the choice the stuck up pretentious "mine is better" people could still use their fancy g-sync monitors they paid oh so much money for but the normal every day sane people who really dont care could still use a freesync if they wanted to.
 

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
Tune the chip? What? NVIDIA does that for you. When you get it, it works.

Part of the reason they have such bad ghosting is because their driver has to specifically be tuned for each kind of panel. They won’t be able to keep up with the panel variations. We tune our G-Sync module for each monitor, based on its specs and voltage, which is exactly why you won’t see ghosting from us.
I mean if you don't have a Gsync monitor you don't have Gsync! Again, that is how it works... the only drawback is that it is more expensive. I don't think you brought to the table anything negative except cost...

Why are you against this again? If it was cost, you would be FOR it...
 

bob4933

Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one that doesn't give a rat's butt about these super whamadyne "syncs" lol.

I would gladly sign a petition to get rid of sli signatures though ....


For now it's simply business. Nvidia has no reason to support free sync at this point in time. You're asking them to literally give up a cash revenue for some idolistic psuedo-"morality" issue that frankly doesn't exist. If the market sways majority to free sync , it's pretty common sense. Want a real protest action ??? Don't buy a g sync monitor .
 
Last edited:

wagex

Chapstick Eating Premium Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2011
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one that doesn't give a rat's butt about these super whamadyne "syncs" lol.

I would gladly sign a petition to get rid of sli signatures though ....


For now it's simply business. Nvidia has no reason to support free sync at this point in time. You're asking them to literally give up a cash revenue for some idolistic psuedo-"morality" issue that frankly doesn't exist. If the market sways majority to free sync , it's pretty common sense. Want a real protest action ??? Don't buy a g sync monitor .

i doubt it [gsync] is generating very much money if any at all. if anything theyd sell more gpu's with people being like oh i can use freesync or gsync if i buy a nvidia card vs only freesync with amd.

lastly freesync is just another name for adaptive sync which is a vesa standard not anything done by amd or nvidia.

now i could go gsync and spend an extra few hundred bucks on a monitor, or buy an amd card and save the money and get a better card giving more money to amd and use freesync. "its a business standpoint" is a null argument since when is giving more features losing them money?

i havent seen it labeled as a morality issue at all?
and im pretty positive if they are trying to get freesync to be used with nvidia i dont think they have purchased a gsync monitor?!!?!
 
Last edited:

bob4933

Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
i doubt it [gsync] is generating very much money if any at all. if anything theyd sell more gpu's with people being like oh i can use freesync or gsync if i buy a nvidia card vs only freesync with amd.

lastly freesync is just another name for adaptive sync which is a vesa standard not anything done by amd or nvidia.

now i could go gsync and spend an extra few hundred bucks on a monitor, or buy an amd card and save the money and get a better card giving more money to amd and use freesync. "its a business standpoint" is a null argument since when is giving more features losing them money?

i havent seen it labeled as a morality issue at all?
and im pretty positive if they are trying to get freesync to be used with nvidia i dont think they have purchased a gsync monitor?!!?!

You're sincerely barking up the wrong tree. I don't really care, and petitions are generally used to provoke morality issues , not business concerns. "Its not "fair" that Nvidia doesn't support free sync " blah blah.

The market will decide what nvidia does. You think they aren't getting kick backs from "g sync monitors"??? That's a selling point for monitors. Same as sli signatures. Its all licensing initiatives. You buying amd and going free sync doesn't make my point magically "null" either. That's a rather myopic statement to be blunt.

fwiw to directly answer your question : Nvidia licenses g sync for monitor companies. Those companies pay nvidia licensing fees to use the 'g sync' name as it becomes a feature; a selling point that entices people to buy that monitor over a different one. Why would nvidia arbitrarily STOP licensing g sync monitors because a few people sign an online petition? Its a silly request at best, but youre completely entitled to have your own opinions about it. I really dont care.
 

wagex

Chapstick Eating Premium Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2011
You're sincerely barking up the wrong tree. I don't really care, and petitions are generally used to provoke morality issues , not business concerns. "Its not "fair" that Nvidia doesn't support free sync " blah blah.

The market will decide what nvidia does. You think they aren't getting kick backs from "g sync monitors"??? That's a selling point for monitors. Same as sli signatures. Its all licensing initiatives. You buying amd and going free sync doesn't make my point magically "null" either. That's a rather myopic statement to be blunt.

fwiw to directly answer your question : Nvidia licenses g sync for monitor companies. Those companies pay nvidia licensing fees to use the 'g sync' name as it becomes a feature; a selling point that entices people to buy that monitor over a different one. Why would nvidia arbitrarily STOP licensing g sync monitors because a few people sign an online petition? Its a silly request at best, but youre completely entitled to have your own opinions about it. I really dont care.

no one is asking them to stop licensing them i dont think you get the gist of what is going on at all. i literally am barking up the wrong tree because said tree has no fruits.

i understand how gsync' income works, but they are going to sell it regardless if they have activesync enabled on their cards or not, i am willing to bet they'd make the difference in sales from selling more cards because of people buying amd because they dont want to pay the premium for a gsync monitor.

who has said anything about nvidia stopping gsync? now you are just puting words in mouths at this point.

i think you are getting way to worked up about something that has nothing to do with you anyways considering you "feel like I'm the only one that doesn't give a rat's butt about these super whamadyne "syncs" lol."

maybe the people signing the petition have nvidia cards and alraedy have monitors that support active sync and dont want to go blow a few hundred bucks on another monitor but want some kind of sync?

i have a freesync monitor and i dont even use it lol dont start on me being a whiner crying because something isnt fair.
 
Last edited:

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
Ok... well... that is enough gents. No more responses directed at anything but the topic please. No passive aggressive barbs, thinly veiled attacks, or wordsmithing to needle people. I am sure we all get your points. :)

Carry on!
 

mackerel

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2008
nvidia can't support freesync if they want to keep g-sync. Say they have a way to offer support to both. Basically everyone else will just go freesync as it'll work with red and green without extra effort. Any advantages g-sync may or may not have will become secondary to the mass market.

If my memory isn't too far off, AMD developed free sync in response to g-sync, but offered it free in the hopes of driving adoption. So I don't believe they used an existing standard, but they created it and made it the open one.
 

Janus67

Benching Team Leader
Joined
May 29, 2005
nvidia can't support freesync if they want to keep g-sync. Say they have a way to offer support to both. Basically everyone else will just go freesync as it'll work with red and green without extra effort. Any advantages g-sync may or may not have will become secondary to the mass market.

If my memory isn't too far off, AMD developed free sync in response to g-sync, but offered it free in the hopes of driving adoption. So I don't believe they used an existing standard, but they created it and made it the open one.

I don't see why they couldn't support both. Active Sync is just a display port vesa standard feature:
http://hexus.net/tech/news/monitors/69693-adaptive-sync-incorporated-vesa-displayport-12a-standard/

It has existed since ~2009, well before AMD was branding things 'FreeSync' that they basically utilized the featureset to make their own branding. As far as I know ActiveSync and FreeSync are essentially the same thing.

I agree with the others that nVidia has little (but some) reason to do it. But technically g-sync is a superior technology to A-sync/FreeSync so there is still benefit for a user to buy a g-sync monitor, but letting consumers have choice is rarely a bad thing. I currently have a asus 1440p 144hz ips FreeSync monitor that works well. I would really like to buy a gtx1080 and upgrade from my 290x(s) but don't want to drop an additional $500-700 on a decent g-sync monitor when I have something that is relatively similar infront of me. Otherwise I can just turn off the freesync features and treat it as a 144hz monitor (which is fine, but not ideal).
 

Zantal

Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2009
Amd and nvidia cover different section of the market, where amd lacks in features or quality and nvidia lacks in "consumer friendly" products.

If they suddenly went with adaptive sync standard some people will treat it as if they are admitting g-sync is not doing well for them, and no amount of press talks and explanations will convince that people that they haven't been scammed from the beginning, even if they really were not. you know what could happen to a company when they suddenly change direction.

This is not about you and me or all the consumers, it is about 2 dogs fighting each other to get more money possible.

I understand both companies' tactics, I am more in line with the greedy son of **** from nvidia, and in their place I would have done the same thing, you want good stuff? you pay a lot more you want the cheap stuff? maybe our competition can help you.

As I said again it's about image and how you portray yourself to your market share that will help you keep it.
 

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
Or... hey... 'we understand that this product may not be for everyone. To that end, we have enabled an alternative method in freesync'.

:confused:
 

mackerel

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Maybe my point earlier didn't get across well. Say nvidia were to support both g-sync and freesync. AMD already support freesync. In a quick search, Intel have expressed an intent to support freesync (I'm going to call it freesync as opposed to adaptive sync to keep things simple). Monitor manufacturers will go, everyone supports freesync, we'll focus on implementing that. G-sync would be effectively dead from that point on. You can say, they can still offer g-sync, but it'll be a hard sell if freesync is almost as good for practically no extra cost. The race to the bottom will take over.

I suspect when Intel eventually gets on board and picks up steam, that'll swing the market over to freesync through their numbers.