• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

AMD demos "FreeSync": [Similar to G-Sync, does require hardware]

Z

Zombie James

Banned
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7641/amd-demonstrates-freesync-free-gsync-alternative-at-ces-2014

Using two Toshiba Satellite Click notebooks purchased at retail, without any hardware modifications, AMD demonstrated variable refresh rate technology. According to AMD, there’s been a push to bring variable refresh rate display panels to mobile for a while now in hopes of reducing power consumption (refreshing a display before new content is available wastes power, sort of the same reason we have panel self refresh displays). There’s apparently already a VESA standard for controlling VBLANK intervals. The GPU’s display engine needs to support it, as do the panel and display hardware itself. If all of the components support this spec however, then you can get what appears to be the equivalent of G-Sync without any extra hardware.

In the case of the Toshiba Satellite Click, the panel already supports variable VBLANK. AMD’s display engines have supported variable VBLANK for a couple of generations, and that extends all the way down to APUs. The Satellite Click in question uses AMD’s low cost Kabini APU, which already has the requisite hardware to support variable VBLANK and thus variable display refresh rates (Kaveri as well as AMD's latest GPUs should support it as well). AMD simply needed driver support for controlling VBLANK timing, which is present in the latest Catalyst drivers. AMD hasn’t yet exposed any of the controls to end users, but all of the pieces in this demo are ready and already available.

The next step was to write a little demo app that could show it working. In the video below both systems have V-Sync enabled, but the machine on the right is taking advantage of variable VBLANK intervals. Just like I did in our G-Sync review, I took a 720p60 video of both screens and slowed it down to make it easier to see the stuttering you get with V-Sync On when your content has a variable frame rate. AMD doesn’t want to charge for this technology since it’s already a part of a spec that it has implemented (and shouldn’t require a hardware change to those panels that support the spec), hence the current working name “FreeSync”.
Click to expand...

In our review I was pretty pleased with G-Sync. I’d be even more pleased if all panels/systems supported it. AMD’s “FreeSync” seems like a step in that direction (and a sensible one too that doesn’t require any additional hardware). If variable VBLANK control is indeed integrated into all modern AMD GPUs, that means the Xbox One and PS4 should also have support for this. Given G-Sync’s sweet spot at between 40 - 60 fps, I feel like “FreeSync” would be a big win for AMD’s APUs.
Click to expand...

Go, go, competition.
 
E

Enduin

No bald cap? Lies!
This and Mantle=

Denzel-Washington-Boom-Gif.gif
 
Dice

Dice

Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
On PS4 and XB1??

So you're saying there is a chance screen tearing could disappear from console games????
 
D

Damaniel

Banned
Certainly the biggest win for something like this would be on the consoles, assuming that the display you're attached to supports variable VBLANK. If there's only a small number of monitors or TVs out there that support it, then this isn't too much better of a solution than G-Sync, because we'd still have to buy updated displays to use it.

However, I'm all for competition, and more importantly I'm all for anything that makes gameplay at sub-60fps framerates even smoother.
 
M

Mrbob

Member
KOHIPEET said:
They say that the demo wasn't as nice as Nvidia's. The tech, and the end result in games could be identical. If it is, than this is pretty good.
Click to expand...

We'll see. AMD likes to make a lot of claims. Either way we'll all have to own new displays anyway.
 
Jibbajabbawockky

Jibbajabbawockky

Member
Damaniel said:
If there's only a small number of monitors or TVs out there that support it, then this isn't too much better of a solution than G-Sync, because we'd still have to buy updated displays to use it.
Click to expand...

That seems to be the catch. If at the end of the day you're going to need a new monitor/display for this to work, its not that much different than Gsync.

Seanspeed said:
So no extra hardware except a GPU and display that support the tech?
Click to expand...

Which would basically be the same as what Nvidia is doing with Gsync- you'd need a compatible GPU plus monitor.


So this is pretty much the same as Gsync, but doesn't work quite as well. You'll still need a new display but just instead of a new Nvidia card it'll be a new AMD card.
 
U

Unknown Soldier

Member
I was under the impression this trick only applies to analog VGA inputs. It's how you changed the refresh rate on CRTs back in the day.

I want to see this working though. If this has always been there, why would Nvidia not have used it?
 
Sentenza

Sentenza

Member
Dreams-Visions said:
No, Gsync requires a monitor to be equipped with a proprietary piece of hardware. This solution simply requires a monitor support the existing VBLANK standard, according to the article.
Click to expand...
That's the same thing said in a different way. Don't you realize it?
Both require a GPU and a panel that support variable sync. They are just two different kinds of variable sync.
 
R

RealMeat

Banned
I wonder how wide spread support for this is. Seems like if it was wide spread, we'd be using it already. In any case, I'm all for an open solution. Also, does this work over HDMI or is it more for stuff like tablets?
 
Z

Zombie James

Banned
TucoBenedictoPacifico said:
Yeah, I don't get that part. Isn't that exactly what G-Sync requires, as well?
It reads almost like a play with words to confuse people.
Click to expand...

No, G-Sync requires a separate hardware module. Variable VBLANK is already a VESA standard according to the article (for how long, I don't know), so in theory any monitor that supports the standard or will support the standard in the future will support FreeSync out of the box without proprietary hardware.
 
T

TheSeks

Blinded by the luminous glory that is David Bowie's physical manifestation.
Lactose_Intolerant said:
It is a standard, but like you said, the monitor has to actually have that function. The difference seems to be that there won't be a licensing fee because it is free.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but it seems VBLANK has been around longer than NV-sync, so that tips it in AMD's favor. If your old monitor supports it: You can get NV-sync-like ability right now with an AMD card.

DirgeExtinction said:
Wait, so is this only for AMD powered machines?
Click to expand...

AMD GPU's, yes. Unless Nvidia capitulates. Same for Mantle.
 
N

No Love

Banned
AMD just dropped a megaton on Nvidia. And thank GOD. GSync was looking like another huge proprietary Nvidia cash-grab.

Bring on the FreeSync.
 
D

Dreams-Visions

Member
TucoBenedictoPacifico said:
That's the same thing said in a different way. Don't you realize it?
Both require a GPU and a panel that support variable sync. They are just two different kinds of variable sync.
Click to expand...

But it's not. One is a proprietary technology while the other is a standard. The consumer experience is similar (if your monitor doesn't support it you have to go buy one that does), but the end-game is different. Existing standards that can be leveraged by all without further costs/royalties/hardware have a better shot at universal adoption than proprietary technologies. Unless I'm misunderstanding G-Sync being limited to Nvidia GPUs.
 
Sentenza

Sentenza

Member
Zombie James said:
No, G-Sync requires a separate hardware module.
Click to expand...
OR new monitors that will support this thing natively coming out in the next months.

Variable VBLANK is already a VESA standard according to the article (for how long, I don't know)
Click to expand...
... Being defined right now, that will be implemented in future monitors.
It's the same scenario, just with a different flavor.
 
N

No Love

Banned
Dreams-Visions said:
But it's not. One is a proprietary technology while the other is a standard. The consumer experience is similar (if your monitor doesn't support it you have to go buy one that does), but the end-game is different. Existing standards that can be leveraged by all without further costs/royalties have a better shot at universal adoption than proprietary technologies. Unless I'm misunderstanding G-Sync being limited to Nvidia GPUs.
Click to expand...

Correct. G-Sync is Nvidia exclusive. I hope it dies a quick death and everyone jumps on the FreeSync train instead.
 
D

Damaniel

Banned
Jibbajabbawockky said:
That seems to be the catch. If at the end of the day you're going to need a new monitor/display for this to work, its not that much different than Gsync.
Click to expand...

About the only possible advantage in that case is that the extra cost of the G-Sync hardware wouldn't be included in the display because it wouldn't be necessary. But if you're already spending $1k+ for a large (and possibly 4k) TV, the small cost of the G-Sync hardware is a drop in the bucket compared to the overall price.
 
ItsTheNew

ItsTheNew

I believe any game made before 1997 is "essentially cave man art."
Wait, the article mentions that this depends on proper drivers from AMD...:(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Introducing G-SYNC Pulsar tech
2
51
5K
TrebleShot replied
AMD announces frame generation for all DX11 and DX12 games
2 3 4
169
14K
Crayon replied
Nvidia has a new graphics Control panel
Analysis 2 3
130
10K
winjer replied
LG Announces 27″ 1440p 240 hz OLED Monitor $999
2 3
126
11K
CobraAB replied
Sony Officially Launches the 'InZone M3' Gaming Monitor for $529
2
58
5K
alucard0712_rus replied
Top Bottom