KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
Since launch, variable refresh rate technologies like FreeSync and G-Sync have gone on to become staple features for PC gamers, removing things like screen tearing while making games feel smoother by letting the GPU control the monitor's refresh rate so that it matches your frame rate. However, there are plenty of gamers that prefer to play on a large TV. Unfortunately, these don't tend to support variable refresh rates but it looks like that could change according to AMD.
During an interview with TomsHardware, AMD Senior VP, Raja Koduri was asked about the possibility of FreeSync on TVs, to which he replied: “We are definitely working with the entire display community on getting FreeSync to more places. I think this is something we should follow up…on what we can share at this point on FreeSync TVs”. From the sounds of it, FreeSync on TVs is something AMD is at least exploring behind the scenes, so perhaps we will hear more on that front at some point.
FreeSync is a technology that AMD has heavily marketed, especially since it is open-source and freely implementable. The only thing required is an up to spec DisplayPort connection, which is something we rarely get on TVs. If we could get FreeSync on TVs, then it could not only improve PC gaming on the big
If we could get FreeSync on TVs, then it could not only improve PC gaming on the big screen, but if consoles implemented DisplayPort, it would give console game devs much more freedom with their frame rate targets.
Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.
KitGuru Says: Since owning a G-Sync monitor, I have found it difficult to go back to non-variable refresh rate displays. Not only would this tech help PC gamers who prefer gaming on a TV, but it could also help push console games in a better direction. Nothing is confirmed for now though, but it does sound like AMD is having some talks behind the scenes about it.
Now if only Nvidia would let us use free sync on Geforce cards π
But why?! It’s not like consoles can break 60fps anyway, or they’d be 60fps stable. And standard TV broadcast isn’t erratic.
Why? Because you can plug your PC into the TV too …
Also, do AMD not have freesync over HDMI in Polaris/latest drivers?
It could also be excellent for video playback devices, instead of waiting several seconds for an HDMI re-sync, (e.g. switching from 24p to 60p etc.) the display and output device would always be instantly and perfectly in sync.
Bring it on!
G-sync is a joke. Freesync does it just as well, and without the need of extra hardware (that will raise the price even more).
Only if the marked force their hand. If AMD was in Nvidia’s place they would do the same. The only way AMD can kick Nvidia right in the balls atm is to make their software and tech open source and aim their hardware at the low and medium income gamer and tech geek.
Major clickbait ‘ere…. Majority of TVs on the market do not have DisplayPort…….
I’m actually surprised this article didn’t mentioned AMD has shown Freesync over HDMI in previous presentations. DisplayPort isn’t a requirement anymore.
Not at all, as I posted earlier, active sync can also be done over HDMI.
Additionally, the manufacturers should all put DP on their TVs (Panasonic at least has some) it’s a better standard and more robust connector. We probably need HDCP over DP to keep the idiots in hollywood happy though. π
Most TV inputs were designed to cater for consumer VCD players, DVD players, BD players, cable TV boxes, satellite receivers, videotape players, and so forth….. Tis why we see mostly composite video, S-video, component RGB and HDMI…. There’s also VGA, the only widely used PC video connector for TVs. Most likely to cater for HTPCs…. Currently for TV makers there is not much incentive to add on PC video connections such as DisplayPort or implement any new adaptive sync tech…..
because rather than being capped at 30 you could play at a variable slightly higher frame rate without tearing, correct its not 60fps but 45 is better than capped 30 for example
this requires them to get freesync to work with HDMI or for TV to add DP to there inputs which almost none done. if either or happens this might force nvidia to re think this proprietor crap and the price premium.
Eh…
Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj314d:
On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you donβt check it
!mj314d:
β½β½
β½β½;β½β½ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash314MarketSocialGetPay$97Hour… β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β β«β β ::::::!mj314d:….,……
just maybe, now that we have hdmi 2.0 with rx400 , maybe there would come a long series of hdmi 2.0 free sync tvs (maybe even 4k at that !); i believe that hdmi 2.0 freesync tvs would be great; the question is how expensive would freesync 4k tvs with hdmi2.0 (@ 60hz) be ?
the answer should be wonderful for all of us, in a very very short time, from all the manufacturers;
should we all then, buy into rx400 cards?