So, freesync synchronizes the monitor with your gpu. But what if there are multiple things on your screen with different FPS, like your desktop? By that I mean Borderless Windowed, or just Windowed mode. In borderless window mode, the desktop will still exist along with the game, just not visible because it is covered, does that mean freesync only works with fullscreen?
I have 2 monitors, so I always use borderless windowed instead of fullscreen, does that mean I can't make use of any freesync technology at all? Can someone test this?
Fuck. This seems like a software limitation though. Can't you just sync it to one application only, and ignore the other programs on the desktop, like how it does in fullscreen?
Dylan Morgan
I dunno, ask AMD
Only the free-sync display would refresh differrently anyways
not sure what you mean about different frame rates
David Rodriguez
>I dunno, ask AMD I'm on it >not sure what you mean about different frame rates If you have a 144Hz monitor and run an intensive application in window mode for example, then the application will only be able to display like 50FPS, while your desktop will be rendered at 144FPS. Or whatever else is on your screen. Freesync should just sync with the lower FPS one then.
You know, since your desktop is rendered too, while in fullscreen only the application is rendered.
Isaac Reyes
It's already synchronized when you're in windowed mode.
Ryder Walker
Freesync only works in full screen mode. And it cannot go above 90hz reliability.
Gsync works in full screen and desktop mode and goes up to 165hz.
Camden Wood
>And it cannot go above 90hz reliability. the adpative sync range is from 7hz-240hz or something, it just depends on the monitor
Juan Wood
Fuck, that sucks. I really love borderless mode and I just ordered a freesync monitor.
>also, sent
Jayden Lewis
I have a free-sync display and never use the free-sync on it despite having an RX 480
in any case it's still a solid and usually cheap display
Robert Butler
It depends on the very specific panel that you own. The general limit is 90hz. You might be able to get a few extra hertz by lowering the image quality (fucked up gamma, contrast, etc) and overclocking the panel.
Jayden Edwards
>I have a free-sync display and never use the free-sync on it despite having an RX 480 Well I have an RX 480 too. Do you happen to know how 144Hz without vsync look like in borderless? Much difference over freesync in fullscreen?
Brayden Myers
>The general limit is 90hz why are you guys perpetuating this lie? i can name a ton of freesync monitors that have greater ranges than that, like the xf270hu which has a 30-144hz freesync range, as does the nixeus vue. >every nvidia monitor has gsync up to 165hz! you guys need to stop with the misinformation and fanboy posting.
Eli Richardson
Borderless results in triple buffering and is a form of software vsync.
Let's be dead honest here, who will *honestly* buy a 144hz freesync monitor that cost more than a 165hz gsync monitor? Brands aside and comparing the features objectively it is inferior in every single way imaginable. The closest freesync monitor that comes similar in specs to a $600 gsync monitor is that ezio that cost $1200.
For the mass majority of the amd user base they will be limited to 90hz if they're buying any freesync monitor. They want an cheap alternative to gsync, and that's what they'll get.
Hudson Taylor
I was actually in a study group to subjective determine which technology was better--Gsync or Freesync. Different groups groups got to play different games, and I ended up picking Witcher 3 and Borderlands 2 (other groups ended up getting modern shooters, etc.)
From what I could tell, Gsync did motion better, ie. when you turn the camera really fast, albeit think about it, I don't know if this was due to motion or a decrease in FPS. Ideally, each technology looks the same, albeit there was some blurring with motion with Freesync, like I've said previously. Supposedly there is a limitation with low FPS with Freesync, but each technology isn't without it's own limitations.
One of the questions we were asked was if we would pay more for each technology, and I was shocked and appalled when people answered yes for either technology.
Honestly, it was more of an excuse to get free swag and food than any sort of deep study.
>xf270hu which has a 30-144hz freesync range I have this monitor and in practice it's 40-144hz. It's fine.
Jesus Christ. Stop shilling.
Ryan Flores
Just to give some quick background knowledge of each implementation, while both require compatible hardware to enable, Freesync is more of a software implementation, which is why it's considered so freely and easily to implement, while Gsync requires special hardware on the monitors, which is why its more expensive and an overall better implementation.
However, there's no excuse for the premium nVidia and monitor manufacturers charge for Gsync. It's a damn shame screen tearing bothers me so much.
Josiah Walker
>Using a still image to demonstrate the effects of a time-based algorithm wew lad
Austin Richardson
It's not shilling when it's true. For $600 I would be running a gsync monitor with ulmb turned permanently and only use sync for madvr.
You cucked yourself hard
Leo Reed
>Ideally, each technology looks the same AFAIK there's one important technological distinction between FreeSync and G-SYNC, but I forgot what it was.
hth
Jacob Evans
>For the mass majority of the amd user base they will be limited to 90hz if they're buying any freesync monitor. You are fucking retarded user, stop shilling
There's only 1 1440p 144hz free-sync display that stops at 90hz and it's the ASUS model, the ACER moels and a pixio panel all go to 144hz with free-sync
Chase Morales
You can't use G-sync and ulmb at the same time
Carson Kelly
There's a setting in control center for NVIDIA cards to make G-sync work with both windowed and full-screen. Don't know if it's the same for AMD though.
Ethan Smith
checked
Leo Gomez
>You cucked yourself hard
Literally why?
And who said I paid 600 dollars?
Current NVidia GTX series cards are not suitable for my use-case anyway (virtualization).
Tyler King
A bunch of manufacturers released freesync monitors a while back and had to recall them because freesync couldn't reach the advertised refresh rate.
And stop advertising your freesync monitors that cost as much as gsync monitors. Only cucks buy those.
Not anymore.
Caleb James
Can someone explain to me why we stick with the CRT-optimised standard of frame refreshing as it is typically done? Why don't we release panels that can refresh each pixel independently, allowing for whole regions to refresh at different speeds? That would also allow for some areas to not refresh at all, so only changes to the image need to be sent to the display. I understand that there has to be some degree of a "frame rate" simply by the nature of polling frequencies and such, but why must we limit it so much? A better standard could even save power by not doing anything with static frames.
Colton Martinez
[citations needed]
Bentley Rogers
>A better standard could even save power by not doing anything with static frames. I think calculating the difference between the last and current frame would take more power than just applying it
Jace Powell
How do people even manage to buy a monitor based on what adaptive sync technology it supports?
With how few monitors there are on the market, it's a miracle if I can even find something that even remotely resembles what I want, if there's even one at all. I don't even know how I would add “supports X-sync” to my list of requirements without breaking the reality even harder.
Isaac Hughes
you go to PC part picker and check the free-sync box
Jose Hall
I found exactly one monitor that supports all my requirements. Except that it's $100 above my price expectation, but I guess that's the extra I pay for getting exactly what I want.
Alexander White
Simple answer: It works and the investment cost for developing new tech is high
I fully agree that dynamic, region-based repainting could be better for performance, power saving, and allow multiple framerate-locked applications to exist concurrently.
I mean this is basically what protocols like wayland are already doing under the hood on the software side. But try getting this downstream into the display and GPU hardware.
James Hughes
>But what if there are multiple things on your screen with different FPS, like your desktop? >By that I mean Borderless Windowed
I want to stay on Windows 7 though just kill me I guess
Kayden Rivera
>your freesync monitors that cost as much as gsync monitors.
WRONG.
>A bunch of manufacturers released freesync monitors a while back and had to recall them because freesync couldn't reach the advertised refresh rate.
Wrong on both counts. One monitor was recalled from one manufacturer. The problem wasn't that it couldn't reach it's advertised freesync range (it could) but that when above the advertised range it would drop every 6th frame.
Jaxson Wright
For me, my basic requirement list looks like this:
>4K res >IPS >wide gamut >8 bit >30" or above >no PWM backlight flicker At this point I generally find I already have so few choices that I have to be extremely picky. Ideally, I would also like to add these requirements: >can sync to 48 or 72 Hz >can disable pixel overdrive >non-shitty OSD and controls that were designed to be used by a human >low input latency >low-leak polarizer
But so far I have not even come close to finding a display that supports all of the above, even though they're all very well within the range of what's possible with conventional display tech.
Also, once OLED comes around, I will get to add this to my wish list of what I want my display to have >120 Hz refresh >high SCR
but I imagine finding a monitor with all of the above to be even more of a pipe dream. Now imagine adding “supports G-SYNC”, lol.
Christian Long
>that I have to be extremely picky. meant the opposite
freesync and gsync are both useless technology that are designed for vendor lock-in. you're better off saving the money spent on a higher end amdsync/gsync monitor on a better GPU.
Andrew Cooper
Hypothetically an OS could integrate it well enough to never have it unsync. But I imagine it is probably application specfic.
Mason Ortiz
but freesync is free. Nvidia can use it too, if they want. It's just that Nvidia doesn't want to admit defeat.
Jonathan Murphy
>Gsync did motion better Ok? So you're just making shit up because if there's tearing it has failed completely. >blurring with motion with Freesync That's about the panel or display method used, not judging the technology Gsync vs freesync.
Freesync is objectively better because it's a standard that fully eclipses Gsync.
If compatible monitors suck or not is another matter.
Joshua Foster
>but freesync is free. Nvidia can use it too, if they want.
considering no other implementation of adaptive sync (intel's) has been compatible with amdsync: no. you are regurgitating AMD marketing drivel.
also, both amdsync and gsync monitors and marked up garbage. if you want to eliminate screen tearing you just need to push higher fps, not this input lag adding meme tech
Jackson Cruz
>3280 x 2048 holy shit, just fuck my resolution up senpai. This is only about 3/4 of 4K res btw
>720 cd/m2 peak brightness jesus fucking christ, I hope their OSD lets me reduce it down to 50 cd/m2. (My current monitor does that at “0% brightness”)
Can't read much more out of the specifications. Do you have an independent review from a high-quality source like tftcentral?
Anthony Hernandez
free-sync monitors don't generally cost at all more than monitors without any sync technology
It's also part of the VESA standard, anyone can use it
>cherrypicking from an advertising site >finding deals on his own
I know who i trust.
Hudson Foster
They aren't meant to be used as PC displays
Jack Sullivan
Oh, the 30 bits are actually just 10 bits per color. So it's just a 10 bit display, compared to 8 bit displays, instead of 30 bit per color.
Gabriel Reyes
Thanks for correcting the record raja, but I'm gonna need a fact check on that.
Jose Hughes
It's DisplayPort and EDID. They can be used as PC displays.
Adam Butler
but obviously it costs a fuck ton more than a decent 4k display
like those retarded 1:1 displays
Asher Moore
10 bits per channel (R, G and B) = 30 bit total
Samuel Gomez
>VA instead of IPS good job violating one of my requirements
Julian Hughes
Yes. The main reason I brought it up is because I bought one (supposedly new) for approximately 250 USD. I'm hoping it'll arrive OK, and I wanted to hear opinions and thoughts on it.
Anthony Anderson
try not being a pleb, there's hardly a difference between good VA and IPS
Otherwise buy an expensive as fuck professional 4k display
Blake James
>not rgby
It's shit.
Hunter Morales
the only proper freesync + IPS panel is the ultra-expensive one from eizo
and there are no proper goysync panels because freesync is just the implementation of a displayport standard, and gsync needs you to add a retarded fpga on your monitor which no respectable manufacturer is going to do, so it'll be limited to GAMING crap from the likes of acer.
Joshua Williams
monitor scalers are fpgas retard
Julian Scott
>Otherwise buy an expensive as fuck professional 4k display That's pretty much what I did (2000€ 4K cinema mastering display), but it fails on some of the requirements I listed here: My point was not trying to get you people to give my buying advice, my point was to demonstrate that it's virtually impossible to meet all of these requirements, which is something I can't really understand since they should all be fairly realistic requirements to accomplish.
In fact, most of them are just software (i.e. good firmware programmer). Most of my issues with my current display are due to the absolutely dogshit firmware on the thing. If I could reprogram it myself, I could fix most/all of the issues and make it a perfect display. (Unfortunately, the OSD buttons are virtually unusable by design, which is sort of sad because the old Dell monitor I used before had much, much better buttons. Unusably ergonomics seems to be a modern invention)
Carson Thompson
But that's an additional, propietary FPGA you have to cram into the display internals and connect to your system. They also cost a big licensing fee, which drives the price up by easily $200 just for gsync.
Freesync does it all in software and requires no additonal hardware.
Carson Powell
>the only proper freesync + IPS panel is the ultra-expensive one from eizo What in the fuck are you on about?
What resolution/refresh rate are you referring to? there's a ton of IPS free-sync displays
Brody Ramirez
No this isn't 2011 anymore with upgrade kits. The gsync unit itself is aio.
Brayden Wilson
It'd be cool if you could actually do something useful with that junk.
Aaron Morgan
Also pajeetsync can't do strobing unless you pay eizo $1200
Jaxson Rivera
Back when I had AMD cards and used FS it only worked in fullscreen mode. I had 3 monitors, the main with FS and others without. I ran games fullscreen on the main monitor and FS worked just fine.
In windowed mode things go through DWM which VSync's everything, which is why you never have tearing on the Windows desktop, at least if everything is working properly. A few months ago FS did nothing on the desktop, I doubt things really changed.
>And it cannot go above 90hz reliability. There are 144Hz FreeSync monitors which work just fine, stop spreading bullshit.
Dominic Wright
spot the nvidia fanboy
Logan Flores
>question about how do to windowed VFR devolves into “muh nvidia” “muh amd” shitposting
can Sup Forums just fucking leave with their stupid “my camp” “your camp” bullshit for ONE day? Seriously, this is cringier to read than console “wars”
It's fucking stupid. Grow up and stop fighting over meaningless brands as if your life depended on it
you people are all sad fucks
Liam Clark
in b4 “t. butthurt pajeet” as if it's gonna be so clever
Ian Cook
Whatever that means, you'll still need a piece of hardware. Fitting it into the case costs additional money for the engineers who work on it. You also can't make uniform cases for freesync and gsync, unless you only produce bigger cases and use them for the slimmer freesync too. Different production lines cost extra money. And you still have to pay Nvidia the jewish licensing fee. It's simply not worth it, which is why gsync is dying
Leo Clark
>there's a ton of IPS free-sync displays yes, and they're all shit and plagued with issues
Lucas Price
OP inquired about a feature that is only available on the competing product. What you're seeing is organic discussion. Go back to ledit if you want your hugbox censored synthetic responses.
Owen Long
The real question is, if Gsync CAN sync to windowed applications, then why can't freesync do this? The difference in the implementation is a piece of hardware, but shouldn't this be a software issue? How is hardware related to detecting the application FPS?
Luis Lewis
wow that was painful to read
Noah Taylor
>OP inquired about a feature that is only available on the competing product. If you had actually read OP's question instead of stopping at “freesync”, you'd realize that the question really has nothing to do with freesync vs G-SYNC in particular, but is just a generic quesiton about adaptive syncing in general
>What you're seeing is organic discussion. What I'm seeing is signal being drowned out by mindless “hurr durr t. poorfag” meme shitposting
>Go back to ledit if you want your hugbox censored synthetic responses. oh yes, very original “hurr go back to ledit” response. 10/10 quality, you sure convinced me with those great opinions
Cameron Collins
By the way I have an nVidia card because AMD cards at the moment simply do not have the performance I need (+ CUDA lock-in) but that doesn't change the fact that g-sync is an inferior implementation over what is an open and working standard.
I have a 60Hz 1440p IPS monitor now, it does the job well. When I upgrade, I'll pay up for a 4k OLED when they're reasonably priced (The Dell one isn't released and is supposed to be $4999). If nVidia comes around to freesync by then, great, I'll look for a monitor with one. Otherwise I don't see myself wasting money on an inferior "gaming" monitor with redundant hardware and nVidia tax.
Jaxon Rivera
It's okay, English isn't my native language and I half-assedly typed this while eating
Ethan Robinson
Freesync probably doesn't allow a wide range as control as gsync. You really get what you pay for.
Landon Robinson
>wide range as control But the computer is the part that determines which frames to sync to. It should simply be a matter of "detection" that the driver does. For example, Fraps can detect games and display their FPS inside of the window. If fraps can do this, the freesync driver should be able to do the same, and then simply sync to this frequency, instead of the frequency of everything on the entire screen. Then it should work in borderless windowed too.
Joseph Ortiz
Mostly to do with DE more than anything. Nature of Freesync is to sync monitor refreshrate to FPS as closely as possible, in DE refreshrate is fixed.
Dominic Lopez
Lack of control, documentation, and fragmentation. With gsync you get big time developers like toasty and doom9 folks working on a few monitors and publishing utilities.
Same reason why you always buy a Nexus over some Walmart phone if you plan on rooting and doing customizations.
Angel Allen
But why isn't it possible to detect the refresh rate of the game instead of the whole DE and then sync to that, ignoring the DE and everything else in it. See Fraps example in
Bentley Clark
I have an LG 27MU67-B (2160p, 60hz, ips) monitor and I gotta say I'm not very impressed with freesync.
after some experimenting turning it on and off in different games it barely makes any difference. if there's a lot of screen tearing in a game, it'll only reduce it a little instead of getting rid of it entirely. it was the cheapest 2160p ips monitor I could get either way so I don't care much but if you're having cheaper options without freesync, you should check if it works well on this particular monitor or just save the money.
Jack Parker
>f there's a lot of screen tearing in a game, it'll only reduce it a little instead of getting rid of it entirely. shouldn't it always get rid of it entirely?
Xavier Richardson
I imagine freesync just takes framebuffer data and matches monitor hz with it, and DE just has static framebuffer.
