Why does nVidia continue to push this when most monitors support

>>62305296
what?

>>62305296
Because, like most corporations, it's immoral and trying to push its restrictive, proprietary spew onto everyone.

>>62305313
Freesync is proprietary too.

>>62305319
Maybe not, but it's royalty free. And AMD does push open source code for freesync support on Linux

>>62305319
The standard it's based is not.

if AMD ever looks like they can make a resurgence Nvidia will embrace Freesync to stop them dead in their tracks

>>62305296
Because they have a fanbase of loyal idiots who are willing to pay for something that's available free. Nvidia could support generic adaptive sync via a driver update tomorrow if they wanted to. But then they wouldn't sell any more $150 GoySync modules, and no doubt that's making them a tidy profit.

>>62305319
No it isn't, because there's no such thing as "FreeSync". It's a marketing label for AMD's testing process which makes sure that [monitor]'s adaptive sync implementation works perfectly on AMD cards. In exchange, the monitor manufacturer gets to put the FreeSync logo on their shit. There are plenty of monitors without AMD certification that use generic adaptive sync, which works just the same with AMD cards (though isn't guaranteed by AMD, because they haven't tested it - that's down to the monitor manufacturer).

>>62305296
You can't buy an amd gpu right now

>>62305296
Jewvidia, also its better than freesync.

>>62306465
They'll have to if HDMI starts supporting VESA Adaptive Sync. There's no reason to buy a Gsync or Freesynce monitor if every TV and monitor supports adaptive sync by default, besides ULMB.

>>62307390
FreeSync over hdmi exists fyi, using it atm...

They already use a property variant of the VESA adaptive sync implementation in laptops. The laptops don't have a dedicated GSync chip like monitors do.

because $200 gsync modules.

Also gsync is better than freesync.

G-Sync monitors are at least a 100$ more expensive. I don't think it can be that much better than just using vsync that it would justify the price.

>>62305296
It lets them can charge a $300 premium for including a 0.50$ chip in monitors the stupid goyim keep buying.

>>62307218
>>62307581
>better than freesync

No it fucking isn't. It may be better than the shittiest implementation of free adaptive sync that you can find, but any good implementation is identical to G-Sync. There is no difference. It's the same technology. If you think the proprietary box is better, then you've fallen for Nvidia's marketing hook, line and sinker, and it's partially your fault that Nvidia users have to pay an extra $200 for their monitor because you're helping perpetuate that lie.

>>62305296
Because they make money off it. They charge manufacturers to include it in their monitors.

File: freesync-or-gsync.png (50KB, 990x742px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 990x742px

>>62305296
Because it is better @<60fps

>>62305296
Why does microsoft keep pushing c#?

I don't get freesync or Gsync. I mean, I get it, but I don't get why you'd spend so much extra for it. Just put that money towards a better video card

>>62307390
HDMI 2.1 has VRR (Variable Refresh Rate) which does the same thing as A-Sync and indeed everyone will almost certainty have to support it given HDMI's prominence. G-Sync and FreeSync will also likely be far less important going forward because of this. Though Nvidia does have a patent for combining VRR and ULMB, which if they add as a feature, may keep G-Sync around somewhat longer.

http://www.patentsencyclopedia.com/app/20150109286

>>62307886
I thought gysnc had forced vsync and freesync didn't.

>>62305296
License fees

>>62307886
>this civic is just as fast as a Porsche once you upgrade the engine and tune it perfectly

>>62305296
because freesync doesn't support lightboost.

>>62307886
>No it fucking isn't
stopped reading there

gsync can suck dick
where is my strobing

>>62308512
>tom's hardware
yeah, gtfo

>>62305319
tripfag tripfagging

>>62311049
arent these technologies only going to be of benefit to you if your graphics card is shitty enough to allow your games to fluctuate in frames per second?

>>62308512
Linking that one totally debunked article that got accused of massiive nvida sucking nad was proven right.

The most important advantage that freesync/gsync has to me is eliminating tearing AND input lag at high framerates.

I play a lot of old games. Particularly old FPS games. So that means I can max them out in framerate on my 144Hz monitor. Screen tearing has always been quite jarring to my eyes. It makes things look less visually appealing and, like jaggies, just isn't beneficial to the nature of acurately depicting 3D motion on a screen. Like most people, I've gotten used to it over the years only because turning vsync on in any game introduces some horrible input lag. And I'd rather take the visual aspect of my games looking slightly jarring in motion than fucking horrible input lag.

Every review by popular youtubers and monitor review sites always talks about how beneficial GSYNC/Freesync is for people with lower, variable refresh rates but nobody talks about how it is supposedly solves the decades old problem of having vysnc with no input lag?

File: call_the_cops_I_dont_give_a_fuck.png (382KB, 778x455px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 778x455px

HAHAHA HOW THE FUCK IS FREESYNC EVEN REAL, LIKE NIGGA JUST TURN ON VSYNC AHAHA, JUST USE TRIPLE BUFFERING LMAO

>>62307581
The crap you read on this board, makes you think you are in /b/ instead of /g/.
Illiterate fucks, you don't even open at least a wiki page to read.
Blown staff out of your ass is not, by any means, are not an argument

>>62306465
lol

>>62311055
considering that freesync 2 has an RT of 0.3ms while gsync has 1ms RT
i dont know freesync is already as low as possible now

>>62312038
hi dummy

>>62308512
>toms hardware
>reliable site
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-1600-cpu,5073.html
whoever finds what is missing from that review it wins a cookie

>>62312151
>purch media
>advertiser of intel and novidia products.
Nuf said

>>62309231
No it doesn't

amd doesnt have vsyn anymore tho (thanks to hialgo)
they put the enhanced vsync which basicly caps it at 60 fps but if it drops it disables vsync till it reaches 60 fps again

>>62308575
You've clearly never used neither of those

File: oven town.jpg (94KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 500x375px

>>62305296
>most monitors support Freesync
You mouthbreathing retard, that is because implementing freesync into your monitor doesn't cost you shit and it's another thing you can write on the box
>why does Nvidia continue to push this
Because no one uses AMD GPUs, according to Steams hardware survey, Pascal is less than 1.6% of GPUs used. They can push it because they own the market

Either way adaptive sync is a complete meme, it has no visible effect above about 80fps

>>62313074
>Either way adaptive sync is a complete meme, it has no visible effect above about 80fps

Are you blind or an absolute retard?

>>62313085
I have a gsync and a non-gsync 144Hz monitor and no one can see the difference. Im not holding you back from buying one though.

Sure is comfy posting to this thread on my 27 inch 1080p free synch monitor and rx480.

The monitor was only 150 also. Extremely nice for the money really. I'm very satisfied.

No doubt nvidea customers have similar products in this price range tho right? :)

File: smug shiteater.jpg (51KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 499x499px

>>62313170
>2017
>1080p
>TN
lamoaing at your life

>>62312512
How about you tell me what makes it so great

>>62313170
>27"
>1080p
Enjoy your calculator-tier dpi.