FreeSync Features

In many ways FreeSync and G-SYNC are comparable. Both refresh the display as soon as a new frame is available, at least within their normal range of refresh rates. There are differences in how this is accomplished, however.

G-SYNC uses a proprietary module that replaces the normal scaler hardware in a display. Besides cost factors, this means that any company looking to make a G-SYNC display has to buy that module from NVIDIA. Of course the reason NVIDIA went with a proprietary module was because adaptive sync didn’t exist when they started working on G-SYNC, so they had to create their own protocol. Basically, the G-SYNC module controls all the regular core features of the display like the OSD, but it’s not as full featured as a “normal” scaler.

In contrast, as part of the DisplayPort 1.2a standard, Adaptive Sync (which is what AMD uses to enable FreeSync) will likely become part of many future displays. The major scaler companies (Realtek, Novatek, and MStar) have all announced support for Adaptive Sync, and it appears most of the changes required to support the standard could be accomplished via firmware updates. That means even if a display vendor doesn’t have a vested interest in making a FreeSync branded display, we could see future displays that still work with FreeSync.

Having FreeSync integrated into most scalers has other benefits as well. All the normal OSD controls are available, and the displays can support multiple inputs – though FreeSync of course requires the use of DisplayPort as Adaptive Sync doesn’t work with DVI, HDMI, or VGA (DSUB). AMD mentions in one of their slides that G-SYNC also lacks support for audio input over DisplayPort, and there’s mention of color processing as well, though this is somewhat misleading. NVIDIA's G-SYNC module supports color LUTs (Look Up Tables), but they don't support multiple color options like the "Warm, Cool, Movie, User, etc." modes that many displays have; NVIDIA states that the focus is on properly producing sRGB content, and so far the G-SYNC displays we've looked at have done quite well in this regard. We’ll look at the “Performance Penalty” aspect as well on the next page.

One other feature that differentiates FreeSync from G-SYNC is how things are handled when the frame rate is outside of the dynamic refresh range. With G-SYNC enabled, the system will behave as though VSYNC is enabled when frame rates are either above or below the dynamic range; NVIDIA's goal was to have no tearing, ever. That means if you drop below 30FPS, you can get the stutter associated with VSYNC while going above 60Hz/144Hz (depending on the display) is not possible – the frame rate is capped. Admittedly, neither situation is a huge problem, but AMD provides an alternative with FreeSync.

Instead of always behaving as though VSYNC is on, FreeSync can revert to either VSYNC off or VSYNC on behavior if your frame rates are too high/low. With VSYNC off, you could still get image tearing but at higher frame rates there would be a reduction in input latency. Again, this isn't necessarily a big flaw with G-SYNC – and I’d assume NVIDIA could probably rework the drivers to change the behavior if needed – but having choice is never a bad thing.

There’s another aspect to consider with FreeSync that might be interesting: as an open standard, it could potentially find its way into notebooks sooner than G-SYNC. We have yet to see any shipping G-SYNC enabled laptops, and it’s unlikely most notebooks manufacturers would be willing to pay $200 or even $100 extra to get a G-SYNC module into a notebook, and there's the question of power requirements. Then again, earlier this year there was an inadvertent leak of some alpha drivers that allowed G-SYNC to function on the ASUS G751j notebook without a G-SYNC module, so it’s clear NVIDIA is investigating other options.

While NVIDIA may do G-SYNC without a module for notebooks, there are still other questions. With many notebooks using a form of dynamic switchable graphics (Optimus and Enduro), support for Adaptive Sync by the Intel processor graphics could certainly help. NVIDIA might work with Intel to make G-SYNC work (though it’s worth pointing out that the ASUS G751 doesn’t support Optimus so it’s not a problem with that notebook), and AMD might be able to convince Intel to adopt DP Adaptive Sync, but to date neither has happened. There’s no clear direction yet but there’s definitely a market for adaptive refresh in laptops, as many are unable to reach 60+ FPS at high quality settings.

FreeSync Displays and Pricing FreeSync vs. G-SYNC Performance
Comments Locked

350 Comments

View All Comments

  • marraco - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    I ever owned nVidia GPUs (not fue to fanboyism, but the coincidence of geforces being the sweet spot each time I needed a new card).

    Still, I will not pay for G-SYNC. I don't want to be tied to a company.

    I also can't buy a FreeSync, because is not supported by nVidia.

    Also, hardware supported features tend to turn obsolete at a faster rate than software ones, so I do not trust G-Sync.
  • Murloc - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    same here, I can just wait a year or so before upgrading monitor and gpu, their loss. If in the meanwhile AMD comes up with something competitive (i.e. also not an oven please), they win.
  • Norseman4 - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    But you can buy an Adaptive Sync monitor and use it with any GPU. You won't get the benefits of FreeSync without AMD, but that is all.
  • Tikcus9666 - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    I aint overly worried, tearing does not bother me, I can't say I really notice it when playing, however I am only playing at 1080p with a Radeon 280
  • steve4king - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    Hats off to Nvidia for delivering G-Sync and getting the ball rolling on this thing. They were the first to create a solution for a very real problem.

    Because of NVidia's pioneering, and because NVidia won't license the technology to AMD, AMD had to find their own solution in re-purposing an existing DP1.2a feature to provide the same function.

    It makes sense for NVidia to refuse to support adaptive refresh, until these displays become commonplace. They had the only card and the only display module that could do this, and they needed to sell as many as they could before the competition's technology was viable.

    Soon NVidia needs to reverse that decision, because I'm not going to buy an inferior monitor, just so that I can slap "The Way It's Meant to Be Played" on the side of my computer.

    I fully expect that both will come together on this one. NVidia had a good run with G-Sync. But now it needs to jump on the bandwagon or risk losing out on GPU sales.
  • PPalmgren - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    Unfortunately, I doubt it. While they are great first movers, look at their track record of good tech that could be great tech with industry-wide adoption via less proprietary measures: PhysX, CUDA, 3D Surround, Gsync, etc. They also have a poor history of working with more open platforms like Linux. "Our way or the highway" is the vibe I get.
  • Soulwager - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    What about actually testing the fallback cases, where framerate is outside the monitor's range of refresh rates? We need an input lag comparison when both monitors are maxed out in v-sync mode, and a gpu utilization comparison when framerates dip below the monitor's minimum refresh rate.
  • ncsaephanh - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    Finally, some competition up in here.
  • czesiu - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    "One final topic to address is something that has become more noticeable to me over the past few months. While G-SYNC/FreeSync can make a big difference when frame rates are in the 40~75 FPS range, as you go beyond that point the benefits are a lot less clear. Take the 144Hz ASUS ROG Swift as an example. Even with G-SYNC disabled, the 144Hz refresh rate makes tearing rather difficult to spot, at least in my experience. "

    Does 144hz monitor help when the FPS is ~40?
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    Sure. It draws the frames 3-4 times between updates, so even if half of the frame showed tearing on the first pass it gets cleaned up on the second and third passes. And with VSYNC enabled, you can fall back to 72Hz and 48Hz before you are at ~30 Hz.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now