FreeSync is Cheaper than G-Sync

[WYP]

FreeSync is cheaper than G-Sync, well at least according to the Pre-Order prices.

Read more on FreeSync's pricing compared to G-Sync here.

 

[Thelosouvlakia]

Looking good! Let's hope the price Delta increases between gsync and freesync!
Also we need a review for one of these when they come out, right?

 

[barnsley]

On the link for the LG

**Price TBC: Do not order yet!**

 

[Warchild]

I still think it will be cheaper. AMD in general always undercut Nvidia technology.

 

[Black Magic]

excuse my lack of knowledge, but Freesync & G-Sync are the same? just branding / patent names right?

& if they are the same, I'd priories cheaper providing looks is better also. Sometimes, your just paying for the name.

interesting read though

 

[NeverBackDown]

excuse my lack of knowledge, but Freesync & G-Sync are the same? just branding / patent names right?

& if they are the same, I'd priories cheaper providing looks is better also. Sometimes, your just paying for the name.

interesting read though

They are not the same and the same at the same time. ^_^
(refering to freesync as FS and G-sync as GS)

FS basically uses the new adaptive standard, in Displayport 1.2a, that they helped develop with VESA(article about it here) that is easier to implement than GS. Which in turn allows cheaper prices, ease of production(less problems inherently) and not a lot of actual hardware changes on the monitor side of things. It's an OPEN standard meaning anybody could use it for essentially free. GS on the other hand uses it's own custom scalar that is made by Nvidia, so all monitors must buy it from them and slightly redesign other things to get it to work(not much is changed but they still paid for it). It is not as easy to implement(just stated why) and since it is a propiertary technology developed and owned by Nvidia, they have full control of supply(who they give it to) and prices. Being the classy Nvidia prices are high. They use Displayport 1.2 which does not use Adaptive Framerate. Instead the GPU and Monitor sync up using the custom scalar in the monitor. So while it is not using the open VESA standard it is achieving it in a different way.. just the more expensive and difficult way.

AMD took the easy cheap route. Same thing in the end but done differently.

Now just to put it out there.. there is nothing stopping Nvidia cards from supporting FS. However it's Nvidia and they want to keep GS around as long as profitable.. makes sense from a business side of things but in reality they are not in a position to survive as long as FS due to the open standard that is easier/cheaper to improve then buying a whole new monitor to support GS 2.0 or whatever.

 

[Mysterae]

This is a bit of an unfair comparison, kind of.

The comparison made here is Acer vs Asus ROG is it not? ROG stuff always has a bit of a mark-up, but I agree that difference isn't all due to being ROG, but G-Sync. The truth will be told if a manufacturer makes the exact same monitor (looks, size, frequency etc) one Freesync and the other G-Sync.

Does the fact that G-Sync is more expensive come as a surprise to anyone?

In the old days the motherboard dictated what graphics card the enthusiast bought as they couldn't do both Crossfire and SLI, and of course the other way when deciding on a motherboard depending on your GPU twins. It looks like those days are returning but with monitors, and the problem for AMD and Nvidia is that folk don't change their monitor anywhere near as frequently. I haven't heard it mentioned if any monitors will be both Freesync and G-Sync compatible; unlikely, but that would change the above scenario.

Either Nvidia drop the G-Sync premium, become compliant with Freesync (DP1.2a) or be so much better than Freesync that it's worth the premium. All AMD have to do is watch what Nvidia do next (and of course make graphic cards worth buying ).

 

[WYP]

This is a bit of an unfair comparison, kind of.

The comparison made here is Acer vs Asus ROG is it not? ROG stuff always has a bit of a mark-up, but I agree that difference isn't all due to being ROG, but G-Sync. The truth will be told if a manufacturer makes the exact same monitor (looks, size, frequency etc) one Freesync and the other G-Sync.

Does the fact that G-Sync is more expensive come as a surprise to anyone?

In the old days the motherboard dictated what graphics card the enthusiast bought as they couldn't do both Crossfire and SLI, and of course the other way when deciding on a motherboard depending on your GPU twins. It looks like those days are returning but with monitors, and the problem for AMD and Nvidia is that folk don't change their monitor anywhere near as frequently. I haven't heard it mentioned if any monitors will be both Freesync and G-Sync compatible; unlikely, but that would change the above scenario.

Either Nvidia drop the G-Sync premium, become compliant with Freesync (DP1.2a) or be so much better than Freesync that it's worth the premium. All AMD have to do is watch what Nvidia do next (and of course make graphic cards worth buying ).

I wouldn't exactly call the comparison unfair, yes there is the ROG tax, but do you see any other 1440p G-Sync monitors out there. This is as close to a direct comparison as we can get.

We will see in the next month or so how 1080p monitors compare.

TBH I'm almost considering getting a 1440p Freesync monitor if AMD's next generation is worth an upgrade and I can find somebody who wants my current monitor.

 

[NeverBackDown]

I wouldn't exactly call the comparison unfair, yes there is the ROG tax, but do you see any other 1440p G-Sync monitors out there. This is as close to a direct comparison as we can get.

We will see in the next month or so how 1080p monitors compare.

TBH I'm almost considering getting a 1440p Freesync monitor if AMD's next generation is worth an upgrade and I can find somebody who wants my current monitor.

This was my plan too.. get freesync and next gen GPU.. i'm still rockin my 7950.. I'll probably sell just the gpu and keep the monitor for something else

 

[Mysterae]

I wouldn't exactly call the comparison unfair, yes there is the ROG tax, but do you see any other 1440p G-Sync monitors out there. This is as close to a direct comparison as we can get.

We will see in the next month or so how 1080p monitors compare.

TBH I'm almost considering getting a 1440p Freesync monitor if AMD's next generation is worth an upgrade and I can find somebody who wants my current monitor.

I agree. I looked to see how much would be ROG tax (nice term!) and it's not that much really, it's got to be the hardware of G-Sync pushing it up.

TBH, monitor manufacturers should look at making their monitors compatible with both technologies, but it's either a hardware limitation, cost prohibitive or a contractual agreement stopping them. In a couple of years I reckon monitors will be both, if G-Sync is still around (because Freesync being DP1.2a, is here to stay).

Edited to add a link to the thread about G-Sync without G-Sync module.

Naughty Nvidia!

 

[Coolant]

In the long run, unless nVidia thinks that Gsync monitor sales - lost GPU sales due to lack of FreeSync support > 0, Gsync will go the way of HD-DVD or console cartridges.

Since FreeSync is tied to displayport standard, it'd make sense to support both - it's just that they wouldn't sell any FreeSync modules since everyone would opt for the cheaper option.

 

[NeverBackDown]

In the long run, unless nVidia thinks that Gsync monitor sales - lost GPU sales due to lack of FreeSync support > 0, Gsync will go the way of HD-DVD or console cartridges.

Since FreeSync is tied to displayport standard, it'd make sense to support both - it's just that they wouldn't sell any FreeSync modules since everyone would opt for the cheaper option.

You mean G-Sync?