NVIDIA may be doing something nefarious with "G-SYNC Compatible"

[FordGT90Concept]

AOC G2590FX has been out for a while as a FreeSync monitor. There are reviews that explicitly name FreeSync support about ten months ago when the monitor came out (before "G-SYNC Compatible" was a thing).

Looking at G-SYNC and FreeSync lists, it shows up in both:

But clicking on AOC's link, as well as several stores that have updated the listing to obscure FreeSync support. All completely updated listings only name "Adaptive Sync" and "G-SYNC Compatible" leading consumers to believe that AMD did not, in fact, certify the panel for FreeSync.

This stinks like GeForce Partner Program (GPP). Consult the lists above rather than looking at marketing material that may have been skewed in favor of NVIDIA.

 

[TheLostSwede]

I think you need to look up what the word nefarious means...

Maybe it's just so simple that AOC has decided to promote the G-Sync Compatible feature due to there being a large install based of Nvidia cards over AMD cards and that way they hope to sell more displays?

Nefarious it is not, dodgy, maybe, but you have no proof that Nvidia is the cause of any of this.

 

[Vya Domus]

Remember that anything Nvidia has ever done has been for their own profit and interest, no exception. This is why they have waited so much time before enabling FreeSync support, they are now trying to leverage the whole market their way. To think that people believed this was just them being nice.

Maybe it's just so simple that AOC has decided to promote the G-Sync Compatible

They didn't just "decided", they need to reach out to Nvidia for this and who knows what sort of "other" requirements they have.

 

[R0H1T]

Why the heck is G-Sync compatible even a thing now? With Nvidia supporting adaptive sync are these manufacturers still paying the G-Sync tax? Is JHH lying as he did with that BS "freesync doesn't work" theory

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I think you need to look up what the word nefarious means...

Twisting arms to push your competitor out is quite nefarious in my book. Again, this mimics GPP except instead of GPUs, it's monitor manufacturers bending over backwards.

NVIDIA can easily put requirements on the use of their G-SYNC trademark and that could mean no mention of competing trademarks (e.g. FreeSync). The net result is that this makes it harder to find FreeSync monitors (G2590FX won't show up in FreeSync searches on websites that updated the listing).

Maybe it's just so simple that AOC has decided to promote the G-Sync Compatible feature due to there being a large install based of Nvidia cards over AMD cards and that way they hope to sell more displays?

Perhaps. I created this thread so people watch out for it. In time, it should become obvious if this is a one-off oddity or if it is becoming the norm.

Why the heck is G-Sync compatible even a thing now? With Nvidia supporting adaptive sync are these manufacturers still paying the G-Sync tax? Is JHH lying as he did with that BS "freesync doesn't work" theory

Because certification is important and application of the trademark implies certification.

 

[newtekie1]

IMO, if a monitor company is going to pay to get their monitor G-Sync certified, they're likely going to use it in marketing. On the other hand AMD will slap a Freesync sticker on pretty much anything that has ARR.

Why the heck is G-Sync compatible even a thing now? With Nvidia supporting adaptive sync are these manufacturers still paying the G-Sync tax? Is JHH lying as he did with that BS "freesync doesn't work" theory

Because just because a monitor supports adaptive sync, that doesn't mean it meets the standards nVidia sets for G-Sync. G-Sync, AFAIK, requires the refresh rate to be able to change between at least 45-120Hz. A lot of ARR monitors only go between 45-60FPS. That was fine for Freesync, since Freesync only cared that the monitor was ARR since FreeSync is just a rebadge of the free ARR tech. Also, for some reason, some monitors start to display visual artifacts when G-Sync is enabled.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

IMO, if a monitor company is going to pay to get their monitor G-Sync certified, they're likely going to use it in marketing. On the other hand AMD will slap a Freesync sticker on pretty much anything that as ARR.

I know AMD doesn't charge anything for FreeSync certification (they are out the value of the monitor and shipping cost to AMD though). I don't know if that is also the case with NVIDIA. It should be but that doesn't mean it is.

Because just because a monitor supports adaptive sync, that doesn't mean it meets the standards nVidia sets for G-Sync. G-Sync, AFAIK, requires the refresh rate to be able to change between at least 45-120Hz. A lot of ARR monitors only go between 45-60FPS. That was fine for Freesync, since Freesync only cared that the monitor was ARR since FreeSync is just a rebadge of the free ARR tech.

Basic FreeSync certification means that the display functions as advertised (often requires AMD to tweak their drivers). No more, no less. G-SYNC Compatible certification, yeah, NVIDIA is more stringent.

Also, for some reason, some monitors start to display visual artifacts when G-Sync is enabled.

Because NVIDIA drivers lack AMD's fixes.

 

[IceShroom]

AOC G2590FX has been out for a while as a FreeSync monitor. There are reviews that explicitly name FreeSync support about ten months ago when the monitor came out (before "G-SYNC Compatible" was a thing).

Looking at G-SYNC and FreeSync lists, it shows up in both:

But clicking on AOC's link, as well as several stores that have updated the listing to obscure FreeSync support. All completely updated listings only name "Adaptive Sync" and "G-SYNC Compatible" leading consumers to believe that AMD did not, in fact, certify the panel for FreeSync.

This stinks like GeForce Partner Program (GPP). Consult the lists above rather than looking at marketing material that may have been skewed in favor of NVIDIA.

Especially when their cards need to be support Freesync, as monitor already support freesync.

 

[R0H1T]

IMO, if a monitor company is going to pay to get their monitor G-Sync certified, they're likely going to use it in marketing. On the other hand AMD will slap a Freesync sticker on pretty much anything that has ARR.



Because just because a monitor supports adaptive sync, that doesn't mean it meets the standards nVidia sets for G-Sync. G-Sync, AFAIK, requires the refresh rate to be able to change between at least 45-120Hz. A lot of ARR monitors only go between 45-60FPS. That was fine for Freesync, since Freesync only cared that the monitor was ARR since FreeSync is just a rebadge of the free ARR tech. Also, for some reason, some monitors start to display visual artifacts when G-Sync is enabled.

I know that & I also know originally G-Sync monitors came with their own FPGA modules. Has that changed recently or do these G-Sync compatible monitors run like that "HD ready" TVs of the past? Nvidia also advertised their G-Sync as something vastly superior to freesync, so why the downgrade? G-Sync wasn't just about refesh rates & if I'm in the market for a G-Sync monitor I'd like nothing less than the original/real thing.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Sorry, but this feels like a storm in a teacup right now.

You noticed some change in branding from one company and now assume the sky is falling...

Yes, Nvidia has done dodgy things in the past, but so has many companies. Until you have some real proof in this case, I think you're overreacting.

 

[theoneandonlymrk]

I know that & I also know originally G-Sync monitors came with their own FPGA modules. Has that changed recently or do these G-Sync compatible monitors run like that "HD ready" TVs of the past? Nvidia also advertised their G-Sync as something vastly superior to freesync, so why the downgrade? G-Sync wasn't just about refesh rates & if I'm in the market for a G-Sync monitor I'd like nothing less than the original/real thing.

I agree and this should perhaps be the main point.
Is Nvidia twisting monitor makers arms to remove any AMD labeling, well the evidence is slim but going off it being Nvidia i can't help but expect more.

But as you say ,regardless if the above Nvidia has made a complete mess of it's own standard in that G-sync is not the same as this new G-sync (freesync ok n tech) compatible.
And it's going to take being fully in the know about tech to buy the version your after , and likely some double checking of spec's.
Average joe's have no chance of understanding what's going on with all these versions of variable refresh.

 

[newtekie1]

I know that & I also know originally G-Sync monitors came with their own FPGA modules. Has that changed recently or do these G-Sync compatible monitors run like that "HD ready" TVs of the past? Nvidia also advertised their G-Sync as something vastly superior to freesync, so why the downgrade? G-Sync wasn't just about refesh rates & if I'm in the market for a G-Sync monitor I'd like nothing less than the original/real thing.

Ironically, only the desktop monitors came with their own module, the laptop G-Sync screens never did. Yes, there was some evidence that those modules were doing something, they got hot and some even had fans, suggesting they were doing some kind of image processing/work. But we never knew what exactly they were doing. And the fact that the laptop G-Sync screens didn't need the module suggested that the modules weren't actually doing much.

Now, "G-Sync compatible" monitors don't have the module, they are standard Adaptive Refresh Rate monitors that nVidia has tested to make sure G-Sync worked properly with them(so no artifacts or image issue) and that they are capable of the refresh rate range that nVidia requires. I believe nVidia also has some other requirements, like minimum max brightness, that the G-Sync compatible monitors must meet.

However, you can still enable G-Sync with non-compatible monitors, but the quality is not guaranteed. And that is the difference. The real G-Sync monitors still ensure the best quality possible, the G-Sync Compatible monitors work with G-Sync without issue but might not give the best possible quality, and other ARR monitors that aren't G-Sync compatible might still work but likely won't have the best quality.

Is Nvidia twisting monitor makers arms to remove any AMD labeling, well the evidence is slim but going off it being Nvidia i can't help but expect more.

I think it is far more likely that the monitor makers are going to switch to G-Sync marketing on their own. The reason is that nVidia has made G-Sync out to be the premium of the two technologies(and in ways it is), so it only makes sense for a monitor maker to use that in their marketing.

 

[El Cinico]

Well that's what 82% vs 18% market share will get you. NVIDIA basically admitted g-sync defeat by adopting open standard, and in the end their branding will win out because of install base, every manufacturer is gonna plaster G-sync compatible like a badge of honor, NVIDIA wont even have to push that hard.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

You noticed some change in branding from one company and now assume the sky is falling...

Six months after said monitor debuted. If it were a new model that was specifically targeted at NVIDIA, there would be no reason to be concerned. No, they took a FreeSync monitor, stripped it of FreeSync branding, and replaced it with "Adaptive Sync + G-SYNC Compatible." Explain why "Adaptive Sync" instead of "FreeSync" when it already has certification for FreeSync. This is very abnormal and not something a company would remove on their own because more certification means more potential buyers. Think Asus debuting AREZ and ROG vanishing: the patterns match. US companies didn't bend over backwards on GPP because they knew it would be a relatively easy fight if it came to that. It was the Taiwanese companies that folded (Asus and Gigabyte come to mind but there were others). Guess where AOC is based out of: Taiwan. The same pressure that worked on the Taiwanese GPU AIBs can easily work the same on Taiwanese monitor manufactures.

Yes, I'm not a journalist. I can't go to AOC and ask them why this is happening. I am hoping that bringing this to light does encourage credentialed journalists to ask the questions that need to be asked.

Regardless of reasoning, this move is concerning because it's reducing one trademark in favor of another while misleading and confusing consumers in the process.


For the time being, all consumers can do is reference the official lists in the OP. Marketing material may not be stating the whole truth.

 

[cucker tarlson]

does freesync have a certification ? is this certification coming from amd themselves or are manufacturers free to slap the freesync name on whatever they want ?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Ironically, only the desktop monitors came with their own module, the laptop G-Sync screens never did. Yes, there was some evidence that those modules were doing something, they got hot and some even had fans, suggesting they were doing some kind of image processing/work. But we never knew what exactly they were doing. And the fact that the laptop G-Sync screens didn't need the module suggested that the modules weren't actually doing much.

In laptops, embedded DisplayPort dealt with adaptive refresh rate as part of the VESA standard (mainly to conserve battery power). G-SYNC, and later VESA Adaptive Sync standard, enabled the same tech over external interfaces.

does freesync have a certification ? is this certification coming from amd themselves or are manufacturers free to slap the freesync name on whatever they want ?

Yes, from AMD. They don't have license to use AMD's trademark if it isn't certified. The same is likely true of NVIDIA and G-SYNC.

 

[cucker tarlson]

In laptops, embedded DisplayPort dealt with adaptive refresh rate as part of the VESA standard (mainly to conserve battery power). G-SYNC, and later VESA Adaptive Sync standard, enabled the same tech over external interfaces.


Yes, from AMD. They don't have license to use AMD's trademark if it isn't certified. The same is likely true of NVIDIA and G-SYNC.

then why are there ones that support 35-90 range on a 144hz monitor if they're certified ?

 

[theoneandonlymrk]

Ironically, only the desktop monitors came with their own module, the laptop G-Sync screens never did. Yes, there was some evidence that those modules were doing something, they got hot and some even had fans, suggesting they were doing some kind of image processing/work. But we never knew what exactly they were doing. And the fact that the laptop G-Sync screens didn't need the module suggested that the modules weren't actually doing much.

Now, "G-Sync compatible" monitors don't have the module, they are standard Adaptive Refresh Rate monitors that nVidia has tested to make sure G-Sync worked properly with them(so no artifacts or image issue) and that they are capable of the refresh rate range that nVidia requires. I believe nVidia also has some other requirements, like minimum max brightness, that the G-Sync compatible monitors must meet.

However, you can still enable G-Sync with non-compatible monitors, but the quality is not guaranteed. And that is the difference. The real G-Sync monitors still ensure the best quality possible, the G-Sync Compatible monitors work with G-Sync without issue but might not give the best possible quality, and other ARR monitors that aren't G-Sync compatible might still work but likely won't have the best quality.



I think it is far more likely that the monitor makers are going to switch to G-Sync marketing on their own. The reason is that nVidia has made G-Sync out to be the premium of the two technologies(and in ways it is), so it only makes sense for a monitor maker to use that in their marketing.

While I get that, it's also normal for manufacturers to list All of the features it has support for to entice a wider client pool and ensure the customer of the products viability jn the future.
It's not normal to remove a listed support feature that you were selling it with for a time and is still available for use on the product.
They're are many reasons this might have happened, however thinking that Nvidia are beyond such things is definitely , absolutely wrong, they are.
This would need far more proof then this though to be sure.
But given the last big Amd label squashing offensive by Nvidia was not long ago and started very similar to this ,i repeat i do expect this story to grow.

It's actually quite transparent just what Nvidia are doing , G-sync didn't sell enough for freesync to be squashed out of existence.
Everyone didn't believe huang freesync was broke.
So Nvidia will strive to subvert the underlying tech of freesync to be labelled as Nvidia bringing their tech to a wider audience without a Gsync tax because they care about our pockets, hmnn.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

then why are there ones that support 48-90 range on a 144hz monitor if they're certified ?

There are three FreeSync certification programs:
1) FreeSync: AMD has verified that the manufacturer claims are true and functioning. There's no limitation other than VESA adaptive sync works as advertised.
2) FreeSync 2: [depreciated] AMD has verified that the monitor has a suitable range for LFC, low input latency, and is capable of HDR using AMD's testing protocol.
3) FreeSync 2 HDR: Same as FreeSync 2 but instead of AMD's HDR testing protocol, they test the panel to conform to VESA DisplayHDR 600.

Official source: https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/free-sync

Only FreeSync 2/HDR places G-SYNC-like requirements on the panel. FreeSync does not.

 

[cucker tarlson]

There are three FreeSync certification programs:
1) FreeSync: AMD has verified that the manufacturer claims are true and functioning. There's no limitation other than VESA adaptive sync works as advertised.
2) FreeSync 2: [depreciated] AMD has verified that the monitor has a suitable range for LFC, low input latency, and is capable of HDR using AMD's testing protocol.
3) FreeSync 2 HDR: Same as FreeSync 2 but instead of AMD's HDR testing protocol, they test the panel to conform to VESA DisplayHDR 600.

Official source: https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/free-sync

well,at least they're checking.
but if the monitor says 144hz freesync it should have both at the same time,not one at a time.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I'm not sure that I follow. A certified FreeSync panel can be 144 Hz but not qualify for FreeSync 2/HDR. FreeSync 2/HDR go far beyond what FreeSync alone does.

G-SYNC Ultimate ~= FreeSync 2 HDR (think the only difference is resolution--FS2HDR doesn't care, Ultimate does)

 

[LFaWolf]

Remember that anything Nvidia has ever done has been for their own profit and interest, no exception. This is why they have waited so much time before enabling FreeSync support, they are now trying to leverage the whole market their way. To think that people believed this was just them being nice.

I have yet to come across a for profit company, that everything it does, is not for its own profit and interest. If you know of one, please share. Nvidia, the great evil empire that many here despise, is no exception.

A sensational clickbait title.

 

[cucker tarlson]

I'm not sure that I follow. A certified FreeSync panel can be 144 Hz but not qualify for FreeSync 2/HDR. FreeSync 2/HDR go far beyond what FreeSync alone does.

G-SYNC Ultimate ~= FreeSync 2 HDR (think the only difference is resolution--FS2HDR doesn't care, Ultimate does)

the page says

but the specs say,in small print

so a 144hz freesync monitor-technically that's true,but can't have 144 and freesync at the same time.


nvidia mentions adaptive sync in addition to g-sync.is nvidia even allowed to market this as freesync ?

 

[Caring1]

Isn't Freesync and Adaptive Sync differing standards?
The former being implemented by AMD, the latter an industry standard.

 

[cucker tarlson]

Isn't Freesync and Adaptice Sync differing standards?
The former being implemented by AMD, the latter an industry standard.

they're the same,but I guess point one from this post doesn't apply if it's not freesync
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/nvidia-may-be-doing-something-nefarious-with-g-sync-compatible.254413/#post-4026310

haven't those aoc panels been named freesync compatible before ? if so,it'll work.


also,isn't it your first thought that the retailer is trying to confuse the buyer,but rather nvidia is forcing the entire industry to remove freesync branding ?