Nvidia has been using the word "mobile" for years now, there's nothing wrong with that. In fact, the 900M/800M series you see in notebooks, what do you think the "M" stands for? Notebooks are mobile devices by definition after all, although the current connotation would be more smartphone and tablets
The issue with Nvidia specifically is that 'mobile' has come to encompass 'tablets and phones' rather than laptops/notebooks. And Nvidia have their own line of tablets and small devices (under the Shield brand). 'Mobile G-Sync' could be taken to mean 'G-sync coming to Shield devices', which would not be correct at this time, whereas 'laptop G-Sync' or 'Notebook G-Sync' is unambigous.
What's proper? How do you define the word mobile that makes them totally wrong? I think you're suffering from a narrow definition of the word mobile here.
As someone else has already noted, "mobile" has been the traditional branding for laptop products for many years now.
However your point is noted, and you are pretty much correct. Internally we don't classify laptops as mobile, nor do we tag them as such. It's a bit late to change this article and title now, and there was no intention to be clickbaity in the title, but we will work on being more precise in future titles.
I'd like to see them and their partners try to get the cost down for G-Sync monitors. It's a good idea, but paying almost double for a G-Sync monitor is a bit much. I'm in Canada, so maybe pricing makes more sense elsewhere, but here a cheap AOC G-Sync monitor is about $500 (I'm sure you could dig around and get it a bit cheaper) and a 144hz non-G-Sync monitor is about $320. I guess I'll just have to wait until the technology is more widespread.
It's not really about costs, it's about how corporations price things. They just try to get higher margins on special features like 4k, 144Hz or G-Sync and there is less competition in niche segments so less pricing pressure and fewer deals.
We specifically asked about the pricing premium on G-SYNC monitors. NVIDIA wouldn't say what the G-SYNC module costs an OEM, but there's going to be a premium of course. But they did say that right now, G-SYNC is being used as a differentiator and they feel that with more companies in the market, the competition will bring the prices down.
Very interesting developments regarding Nvidia's G-Sync 2.0 that does away with the module in laptops, however, I wonder if that means that solution will be subject to the same limitations AMD sees regarding low-FPS ranges, where there is no lookaside/local buffer to handle low FPS by repeating frames.
These are all things Tom Petersen said before though, regarding eDP and Variable refresh rate, he didn't think an amendment to the DP standard was needed as everything was already there. It just looks like Nvidia has figured out the nuances of variable OverDrive before AMD.
It also opens up the possibility Nvidia offers a G-Sync Lite on the desktop for monitors that don't need the G-Sync module, but again, we'll need to see if that also means you forego the benefits of G-Sync that we see over FreeSync at the low refresh range of the spectrum.
This actually is basically the same as FreeSync. Adaptive Sync support on the display side and driver support for Adaptive Sync. I predict that Nvidia and AMD will keep using different brand names, but the technology is obviously on a collision course. All we need is for Intel to support it too and 99% of the GPU market would support Adaptive Sync.
Yes and No. eDP was always specified by both Nvidia and AMD as the precursor for AdaptiveSync, but it didn't require new scalers specifically because the GPU was in direct communication with the display using embedded DP protocols. That isn't the case with desktop GPUs, which is why AMD has to create the DP Adaptive Sync protocol that piggy-backs on Vblank signaling. The ten ton elephant in the room however, is whether or not there are provisions in the desktop Adaptive Sync spec to control overdrive, as it is handled this way on the laptop display side, and how Nvidia handles it using their custom G-Sync scaler.
Beyond that, I imagine there will be logo program limitations even if Nvidia does adopt their own desktop G-Sync module-less Adaptive Sync monitor solution. While AMD has repeatedly claimed there is no licensing fee for FreeSync and that is royalty free, it is Trademarked and displays must pass AMD's logo program qualifcations. I am not sure how open they would be to allowing a co-branded Display that supported both FreeSync and G-Sync (Lite).
Just make a display that supports A-sync. Given that what AMD says about Freesync being only a brand, and that Nvidia's version would be the same, it should work fine with both.
Of course, no one seems to want to launch a monitor with just A-sync branding. And, NVidia is even better at controlling it's brands than AMD. And they do love their proprietary stuff, so, I suspect that sadly we'll end up having a divided market until Intel wakes up and starts pushing A-sync on everything. At which point, neither AMD or NVidia will have a choice but to make sure their drivers work fine without their special branding.
As for controlling the brand more... I imagine AMD would be fine with a monitor also having some NVidia branding. Cannot imagine Nvidia doing the same, due to much better brand control. Something AMD really needs to figure out. Of course, I've convinced that AMD's "marketing" team is an unpaid intern who works an hour or two a week. At least in the NA/Europe markets.
The benefits I would argue isn't the big thing. The bigger thing is that monitors using A-sync scalars appear to only be going down to ~40fps instead of ~30fps.
I think that will matter more to people buying such monitors than how it handles below that threshold. Mostly because if you're buying a monitor to ensure smooth framerates wouldn't you make sure your game doesn't dip below the refresh rate unless it is impossible to do. And, I would say a lot of games dip into the low-mid 30s, but, not often to much lower.
Well, there's 2 main benefits below the minimum window. 1) You still get VRR. 2) You don't get the nosticeable ghosting due to OD being broken and the monitor refreshes the last frame to prevent pixel decay. Nvidia has made it clear there still isn't a min refresh rate and from what they've said about it at PCPer, it seems that's because the GPU is directly controlling all aspects of the display over eDP, ie. the display has all the timing/OD/refresh characteristics exposed to the GPU directly.
PCPer was a guess? Read the TechReport article when they, you know, ask an NVidia engineer. Basically, below the monitor minimum refresh rate, G-sync "guesses" when the next frames will come, and tries to line them up to avoid having to redraw mid-way through a frame.
And, if G-sync works like PCPer said, it would be a terrible latency-inducing mess at low framerates.
I'm not gonna leave my 30" 2560x1600 dell u3014 until I can have 3840x2160 in VA or IPS (preferably VA for the increased contrast ratio) with at the very minimum 96hz or higher refresh rate and g sync or free sync depending on whoevers gpu is better at the time.
Unfortunately we need a new version of displayport that can push higher bandwidth to make high refresh rate 4k monitors even technically possible so I'm gonna be waiting a long time. Not like I'll be that sad using my dell.
Yeah, right now the trade-off of high perf demands and loss of high refresh rate make 4K off limits for me. I'd rather have the flexibility of high refresh and 3D Vision with the option of 5K DSR if I have lots of extra GPU grunt.
I'll also check out the 21:9 1440p ultra-wide for my next upgrade. I already have the Swift 1 so I won't upgrade to Swift 2 when it hits unless it is out of this world in every aspect, but I've been very happy with my Swift 1 so no hurry to replace it. The IPS Swift might be $800 though and just push the Swift 1 down to $600 or so. Keep in mind, Asus did launch the ill-fated FreeSync IPS for $600, and Acer has their own IPS 1440p G-Sync at $800.
Since the new MSI models are the "G72 G", I'm guessing that the existing G72 Dominator laptops won't support it. I'm assuming that the only *physical* difference is in the display panel, which makes me wonder if MSI will release a panel upgrade option for the older laptops. I recall reading something about MSI suggested that panel upgrades weren't out of the question... albeit, this was definitely prior to this announcement.
It looks like the connections between the graphics and the monitor are different, with the G-SYNC having the connection come from the discrete graphics, not the integrated like in an optimus laptop.
I have a GT72 they do not support Optimus, they have a manual switching feature. I also know that people got the Alpha drivers for Mobile G-Sync to work with some of the IPS screen equip models. So I do hope that we will get legacy support for the GT72, if not I'm going to be very upset since I bought my GT72 about 2 months ago.
Ditto for me and my ROG751...the alpha drivers that were leaked worked well, but I find the latest 353.06 drivers do not support g-sync. Any extra info useful...
For a list of current G-Sync and FreeSync monitors (for desktop users), I found this list the best: http://www.144hzmonitors.com/other/list-of-g-sync-... No new G-Sync/FreeSync monitors have been released since then.
Smartphones have something that could probably become similar... Self Panel refresh (i believe I'm getting the name right) only refreshes the panel when the display output changes.
Pretty sure with enough work you could turn that into something similar. If it's not already possible.
What's the status of G-Sync on laptops with Optimus, but which have DP connected straight to the dGPU, do you get g-sync on an external g-sync display with that?
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
37 Comments
Back to Article
jjj - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
Gah stop using the term "mobile" for laptops, seems clickbaity to do so. Even Nvidia isn't using the term improperly like this, they use "notebook".Buk Lau - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
Nvidia has been using the word "mobile" for years now, there's nothing wrong with that. In fact, the 900M/800M series you see in notebooks, what do you think the "M" stands for? Notebooks are mobile devices by definition after all, although the current connotation would be more smartphone and tabletsedzieba - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
The issue with Nvidia specifically is that 'mobile' has come to encompass 'tablets and phones' rather than laptops/notebooks. And Nvidia have their own line of tablets and small devices (under the Shield brand). 'Mobile G-Sync' could be taken to mean 'G-sync coming to Shield devices', which would not be correct at this time, whereas 'laptop G-Sync' or 'Notebook G-Sync' is unambigous.Flunk - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
What's proper? How do you define the word mobile that makes them totally wrong? I think you're suffering from a narrow definition of the word mobile here.Ryan Smith - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
As someone else has already noted, "mobile" has been the traditional branding for laptop products for many years now.However your point is noted, and you are pretty much correct. Internally we don't classify laptops as mobile, nor do we tag them as such. It's a bit late to change this article and title now, and there was no intention to be clickbaity in the title, but we will work on being more precise in future titles.
SparkySamza - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
OMG WINDOWS MODE FINALLY! i've been waiting for windowed mode for my g sync monitor now i have it!!!chizow - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
Yeap, that will definitely be a huge benefit now, looking forward to that for sure.cfenton - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
I'd like to see them and their partners try to get the cost down for G-Sync monitors. It's a good idea, but paying almost double for a G-Sync monitor is a bit much. I'm in Canada, so maybe pricing makes more sense elsewhere, but here a cheap AOC G-Sync monitor is about $500 (I'm sure you could dig around and get it a bit cheaper) and a 144hz non-G-Sync monitor is about $320. I guess I'll just have to wait until the technology is more widespread.jjj - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
It's not really about costs, it's about how corporations price things. They just try to get higher margins on special features like 4k, 144Hz or G-Sync and there is less competition in niche segments so less pricing pressure and fewer deals.Brett Howse - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
We specifically asked about the pricing premium on G-SYNC monitors. NVIDIA wouldn't say what the G-SYNC module costs an OEM, but there's going to be a premium of course. But they did say that right now, G-SYNC is being used as a differentiator and they feel that with more companies in the market, the competition will bring the prices down.chizow - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
Very interesting developments regarding Nvidia's G-Sync 2.0 that does away with the module in laptops, however, I wonder if that means that solution will be subject to the same limitations AMD sees regarding low-FPS ranges, where there is no lookaside/local buffer to handle low FPS by repeating frames.These are all things Tom Petersen said before though, regarding eDP and Variable refresh rate, he didn't think an amendment to the DP standard was needed as everything was already there. It just looks like Nvidia has figured out the nuances of variable OverDrive before AMD.
It also opens up the possibility Nvidia offers a G-Sync Lite on the desktop for monitors that don't need the G-Sync module, but again, we'll need to see if that also means you forego the benefits of G-Sync that we see over FreeSync at the low refresh range of the spectrum.
Flunk - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
This actually is basically the same as FreeSync. Adaptive Sync support on the display side and driver support for Adaptive Sync. I predict that Nvidia and AMD will keep using different brand names, but the technology is obviously on a collision course. All we need is for Intel to support it too and 99% of the GPU market would support Adaptive Sync.chizow - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
Yes and No. eDP was always specified by both Nvidia and AMD as the precursor for AdaptiveSync, but it didn't require new scalers specifically because the GPU was in direct communication with the display using embedded DP protocols. That isn't the case with desktop GPUs, which is why AMD has to create the DP Adaptive Sync protocol that piggy-backs on Vblank signaling. The ten ton elephant in the room however, is whether or not there are provisions in the desktop Adaptive Sync spec to control overdrive, as it is handled this way on the laptop display side, and how Nvidia handles it using their custom G-Sync scaler.Beyond that, I imagine there will be logo program limitations even if Nvidia does adopt their own desktop G-Sync module-less Adaptive Sync monitor solution. While AMD has repeatedly claimed there is no licensing fee for FreeSync and that is royalty free, it is Trademarked and displays must pass AMD's logo program qualifcations. I am not sure how open they would be to allowing a co-branded Display that supported both FreeSync and G-Sync (Lite).
testbug00 - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
Just make a display that supports A-sync. Given that what AMD says about Freesync being only a brand, and that Nvidia's version would be the same, it should work fine with both.Of course, no one seems to want to launch a monitor with just A-sync branding. And, NVidia is even better at controlling it's brands than AMD. And they do love their proprietary stuff, so, I suspect that sadly we'll end up having a divided market until Intel wakes up and starts pushing A-sync on everything. At which point, neither AMD or NVidia will have a choice but to make sure their drivers work fine without their special branding.
As for controlling the brand more... I imagine AMD would be fine with a monitor also having some NVidia branding. Cannot imagine Nvidia doing the same, due to much better brand control. Something AMD really needs to figure out. Of course, I've convinced that AMD's "marketing" team is an unpaid intern who works an hour or two a week. At least in the NA/Europe markets.
testbug00 - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
The benefits I would argue isn't the big thing. The bigger thing is that monitors using A-sync scalars appear to only be going down to ~40fps instead of ~30fps.I think that will matter more to people buying such monitors than how it handles below that threshold. Mostly because if you're buying a monitor to ensure smooth framerates wouldn't you make sure your game doesn't dip below the refresh rate unless it is impossible to do. And, I would say a lot of games dip into the low-mid 30s, but, not often to much lower.
testbug00 - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
I mean the benefits below the minimum refresh rate when I said "the benefits" at the start.chizow - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
Well, there's 2 main benefits below the minimum window. 1) You still get VRR. 2) You don't get the nosticeable ghosting due to OD being broken and the monitor refreshes the last frame to prevent pixel decay. Nvidia has made it clear there still isn't a min refresh rate and from what they've said about it at PCPer, it seems that's because the GPU is directly controlling all aspects of the display over eDP, ie. the display has all the timing/OD/refresh characteristics exposed to the GPU directly.testbug00 - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
PCPer was a guess? Read the TechReport article when they, you know, ask an NVidia engineer. Basically, below the monitor minimum refresh rate, G-sync "guesses" when the next frames will come, and tries to line them up to avoid having to redraw mid-way through a frame.And, if G-sync works like PCPer said, it would be a terrible latency-inducing mess at low framerates.
chizow - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
Oh man, saw that last slide too, PG279Q Swift2 IPS 1440p just as I expected....need more info on that lol.Laststop311 - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
Yea that monitor is going to be the number 1 gaming monitor. It's also going to be close to 1000 dollars i guarantee it.Laststop311 - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
I'm not gonna leave my 30" 2560x1600 dell u3014 until I can have 3840x2160 in VA or IPS (preferably VA for the increased contrast ratio) with at the very minimum 96hz or higher refresh rate and g sync or free sync depending on whoevers gpu is better at the time.Unfortunately we need a new version of displayport that can push higher bandwidth to make high refresh rate 4k monitors even technically possible so I'm gonna be waiting a long time. Not like I'll be that sad using my dell.
chizow - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
Yeah, right now the trade-off of high perf demands and loss of high refresh rate make 4K off limits for me. I'd rather have the flexibility of high refresh and 3D Vision with the option of 5K DSR if I have lots of extra GPU grunt.I'll also check out the 21:9 1440p ultra-wide for my next upgrade. I already have the Swift 1 so I won't upgrade to Swift 2 when it hits unless it is out of this world in every aspect, but I've been very happy with my Swift 1 so no hurry to replace it. The IPS Swift might be $800 though and just push the Swift 1 down to $600 or so. Keep in mind, Asus did launch the ill-fated FreeSync IPS for $600, and Acer has their own IPS 1440p G-Sync at $800.
Aikouka - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
Since the new MSI models are the "G72 G", I'm guessing that the existing G72 Dominator laptops won't support it. I'm assuming that the only *physical* difference is in the display panel, which makes me wonder if MSI will release a panel upgrade option for the older laptops. I recall reading something about MSI suggested that panel upgrades weren't out of the question... albeit, this was definitely prior to this announcement.xthetenth - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
It looks like the connections between the graphics and the monitor are different, with the G-SYNC having the connection come from the discrete graphics, not the integrated like in an optimus laptop.shadowjk - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
I believe none of the MSI GT72 laptops support optimus.dutchman47 - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
I have a GT72 they do not support Optimus, they have a manual switching feature. I also know that people got the Alpha drivers for Mobile G-Sync to work with some of the IPS screen equip models. So I do hope that we will get legacy support for the GT72, if not I'm going to be very upset since I bought my GT72 about 2 months ago.tribiyani - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
Ditto for me and my ROG751...the alpha drivers that were leaked worked well, but I find the latest 353.06 drivers do not support g-sync. Any extra info useful...alexbagi - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
For a list of current G-Sync and FreeSync monitors (for desktop users), I found this list the best: http://www.144hzmonitors.com/other/list-of-g-sync-...No new G-Sync/FreeSync monitors have been released since then.
plion - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
so could smartphones/tablets receive this next? Make scrolling and games seem perfect smooth?testbug00 - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
Smartphones have something that could probably become similar... Self Panel refresh (i believe I'm getting the name right) only refreshes the panel when the display output changes.Pretty sure with enough work you could turn that into something similar. If it's not already possible.
TristanSDX - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
We need 24inch 4K IPS monitor with G-Syncshadowjk - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
I wouldn't mind a 24" 1080P IPS G-Sync.shadowjk - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
What's the status of G-Sync on laptops with Optimus, but which have DP connected straight to the dGPU, do you get g-sync on an external g-sync display with that?Brett Howse - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
If you have Optimus the DisplayPort is connected to the integrated GPU as well.bloodypulp - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
Great job Nvidia on implementing AMD's FreeSync in laptops and charging for it. Even better job everyone paying for such "innovation".tribiyani - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
What is the status of gsync compatibility for existing rog751 owners? Are we stuck with buggy alpha drivers that were leaked a month ago?zodiacfml - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
All these just made more interested on what Freesync can bring on notebooks.