Digging Deeper
So there we were, left with G-Sync somehow working on a regular laptop. It just sat there on the table in front of us, showing off its smoothly sweeping pendulum. We bounced around some working theories, one of which was that perhaps this laptop series had somehow shipped with development hardware that ASUS was working on – perhaps for a future G-Sync branded laptop. There was only one way to find that out, and in a blur of iFixit tools, this happened:
We followed the various traces and wires from the GPU output all the way to the LCD panel TCON (the circuitry that translates the incoming eDP signal and fans it out to drive the LCD pixels). Examining each and every component, we found no additional FPGA or ASIC. All hardware was what we would expect for a standard laptop:
We even peeled back the back of the LCD itself and examined every component. No G-Sync:
With the prototype G-Sync laptop theory dead and buried, we then moved to our other working theory. Perhaps the leaked ASUS driver *was* intended for an upcoming G-Sync laptop, but not this one, making this a case of accidental support – meaning that for whatever reason the driver *thought* there was a G-Sync panel in this laptop. It is entirely possible that NVIDIA uses a protocol very similar to the Adaptive Sync standard, and that the LG panel Tcon in this specific line of ASUS notebooks is able to handle that input in some scenarios as it is ‘close enough’ to what it can handle. If this were true, our knowledge of variable refresh rate technology tells is that the experience would not be ideal across the entire refresh rate range.
We know that you can’t simply flip a switch and let any LCD refresh variably at every possible rate. There are side effects to be dealt with, like the fact that pixels drift between refreshes, and waiting too long results in excessive flicker. Adding additional refresh cycles is possible, but that is not a simple solution as the additional refresh must be carefully timed as to not delay a subsequent frame being delivered by the GPU. Complex design problems like this have delayed AMD’s FreeSync launch, and it took a revision to NVIDIA’s own G-Sync module to get that timing just right.
Alright, back to the laptop to test this theory. We needed to push into the lower frame rates and prompt some of the other hiccups that we know to be challenges for even a real G-Sync panel to handle. I quickly reassembled the unit, fired it up, and got back to testing.
I’m sure that posting this
I’m sure that posting this late will effectively bury this comment, but here goes anyway –
I feel that the existence of GSync Mobile, being essentially an eDP adaptive sync implementation, means that a FreeSync monitor is absolutely the way to go regardless of GPU brand used; bear with me on this.
Now that the driver file is in the wild, how long will it be before either a) the EDID for your FreeSync monitor is modified to mimic a mobile monitor, or b) The driver file is hacked and allows your FreeSync monitor to operate in the same fashion, or a combination of a) and b)?
It’s almost a guarantee that by hook or by crook, a single monitor will drive GSync and FreeSync in the near future. NVidia should drop the pretense immediately and offer proper support for GSync on Freesync monitors.
Conversely, once the FreeSync drivers and monitors for AMD are out in the wild, I wonder how much effort the modding community will have to make to get the GSync modules working with AMD cards.
It’d be good for the modding community to start looking into this driver NOW.
You mentioned in the video
You mentioned in the video that if the CPU is busy for a second, the panel goes blank. I think this issue would be greatly mitigated if you change the priority of the game/ driver process in the windows task manager to High instead of normal.
Anyway, This little mishap shows that Nvidia is trying to make G-Sync work without a module. Why is that? Because FreeSync is FREEEEEEEEEEEEEE.
This is Strike out for Nvidia IMHO:
Strike 1: They released a driver that burned GPUs. AMD Never did this
Strike 2: They disabled PhysX when another card was detected in the system. AMD also never did this
Strike 3: They made people pay a $100 premium for G-Sync when they could’ve enable it for free. They didn’t bother to do that until AMD showed the plethora of FreeSync monitors. Because no sane person would pay $100 for a feature they can get for free.
Oh, and for everyone ranting about Maxwell’s Efficiency (Performance wise). AMD was the first to try and improve the efficiency of it’s architecture when they transitioned from VLIW 5 to VLIW 4 and redesigned their GPUs. And they did it again with GCN. Nvidia does it with Maxwell and for some reason, everybody treats it like a new innovation when AMD’s been doing it for years. And let’s not forget who first made the move to unified shader architecture.
However, As much as I dislike Nvidia for their brash strategy, I can’t help but be impressed with Maxwell’s POWER efficiency. They deserve full credit for that.
I just can’t help but notice that Nvidia copies everything AMD does. Sometimes AMD does that too but Nvidia seems to do it much more often.
I thought the whole gsync
I thought the whole gsync chip thing was supposed to be temporary measure before they go ahead and fully integrate said functionality into future GPUs.
Where can i download this
Where can i download this driver?
which gaming laptop screens
which gaming laptop screens currently support gsync ?
Well , i don’t understand a
Well , i don’t understand a lot of the technical stuff but can anyone tell me whether it’ll work on my laptop ( Acer VN7-591G ) or not ? .. help is much appreciated 🙂
nice information