fdsaion
6258
Ah yes a 40m video that would be better communicated via text.
I humbly apologize for burdening you and all readers of this thread with such a horrendous task they must now forcibly undertake. /s
KevinC
6261
Thatâs not enough. 20 pushups and Iâll consider forgiveness.
âOne 3080 ⌠two 3080s ⌠three 3080s âŚâ LOL
MLID actually mentioned 300 bucks for a 12GB card and 400-600 for 16GB Big Navi cards.
I hadnât even considered going AMD for video because I have a G-Sync monitor, DLSS, and the relative maturity of ray tracing for nVidia vs AMD. But when you combine those numbers at those prices with lower power consumption, it sounds pretty damned compelling.
Does anyone think nVIDIA rushed the 3XXX series out the door before it was ready because they were worried with how competitive AMD would be this cycle? This launch has seemed especially incompetent for a company that isnât exactly new to the game.
rei
6265
2000 launch + whole generation was bad too without worthwhile gains or RTX feature adoption.
lordkosc
6266
I think Nvidia needs a more sterile fab site, than Jensenâs Kitchen.
instant0
6267
Unfortunately weâd still have to use the catalyst driver suiteâŚ
How is Freesync anyway, compared to Gsync. I have a freensync monitor but its gsync compatible, and quite like to keep that âfeatureâ.
stusser
6268
âGsync compatibleâ is freesync.
instant0
6269
I know they are supposed to be comparable technologies.
But is is as good, is the question.
Knowing that AMDâs drivers historically have been shite.
Thus me wondering: âHow is freensync compared to Gsyncâ
I think you misunderstand. Thereâs zero difference between Gsync compatible and freesync. I donât mean in features, itâs literally the same exact thing.
Gsync compatible is literally freesync whose specifications (mostly the framerate range that freesync is active for) is good enough for Nvidia to have their Gsync marketing on. So AMD will be able to take advantage of a Gsync Compatible monitor because Gsync Compatible literally equals freesync.
stusser
6271
Right. There are some minor technical differences but âgsync compatibleâ is basically just as good as real gsync, just without the $200 hardware module required in the monitor.
Gsync is a superior technology, but the problem is that it carries a hefty premium that limits its market share (surprise, surprise, surprise).
Freesync is more than good enough for most people, and itâs basically free for any manufacturer to use. Hence, there are a lot more Freesync monitors than Gsync-dedicated monitors, both in in the marketplace and in consumers homes. Hell, I have two.
Gsync-compatible is Nvidia basically recognizing that they were losing the market share battle, and are begrudgingly adapting Freesync. But theyâre trying to keep their own marketing.
stusser
6273
Thatâs the minor technical stuff I was talking about, real hardware Gsync is technically superior but that stuff really doesnât matter much. The problem historically has been that Freesync is all over the place, with restrictive refresh windows, lacking features, etc. The âgsync compatibleâ certification covers all that stuff for Nvidia users, if itâs certified it will work well. And if youâre on AMD, âFreesync Premiumâ and âFreesync Premium Proâ (same thing, plus HDR) does the same thing. Beware just plain âFreesyncâ without any other qualifiers.
You know, that is one thing worth consideringâŚI really like my Acer Predator (which has gsync) but it predates some of the new stuff like HDR.
Would variable refresh work with an AMD Card on a gsync monitor (my understanding is no, but maybe something changed)? If not, would it be worth upgrading to get high dynamic range support? A bit of poking around online suggests the answer is ânot yetâ because of lack of compatible content.
For context, Iâm playing at 1440 on a 27â with no interest in going to 4k
mono
6275
AFAIK, FreeSync generally wonât work on a G-Sync only display.
That said, if you want HDR, itâs the monitor youâd need to upgrade, not necessarily the card. You could pick up an HDR FreeSync panel thatâs G-Sync compatible.
instant0
6276
Samsung LC27HG70 is the one I have.
Course, it only says âFreesync 2â so who knows if that is matching with âfreesync Premiumâ or âpremium HDRâ and if that will affect options/drivers at any point, probably falls into the Premium range.
That said, there isnât a lot of HDR content games that is any good on this, in addition to windows itself looking like shit when its active. It looks good in Divsion 2, Horizon Zero Dawn and âGhost Recon vs. Amazonâ (Forgot the name⌠Point Break?).
One being hardware, more costly and superior technology, other software based and free. Both required to work through game->drivers->screen, but I guess they have attained near parity between features and game+driver maturity to not be a discernible difference for the user.
Whereâs the misunderstanding?
Thereâs zero extra hardware for Gsync Compatible. âGsync Compatibleâ is not the same as âGsyncâ. The former does NOT require new hardware, the latter DOES.
Your LC27HG70 has Freesync 2, which is exactly the same as âGsync Compatibleâ but is not âGsyncâ.
âGsync Compatibleâ and âFreesyncâ are literally the exact same thing.
âGSync Compatibleâ Is literally Nvidia marketing saying that the monitorâs Freesync properties conform to an âacceptableâ VRR performance (acceptable as defined by Nvidia)
