Samsung Updates 2018 TVs with FreeSync Support

rgMekanic

[H]ard|News
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
6,233
PCPer is reporting that Samsung has released a firmware update 1103 for 2018 QLED TVs, bringing them FreeSync support. FreeSync support has been enabled on the Q6FN, Q7FN, Q8FN, Q9FN, and NU8000 sets. PCPer notes that the 55" Samsung Q7F TV can be had right now for around $1700, which is $300 less than the 27" Acer X27 G-SYNC HDR display.

Outstanding stuff, especially with FreeSync being available on Xbox One, can't wait to see more come out.

If you happen to own one of these compatible TVs, you can find the firmware to enable FreeSync on Samsung's support page for your given model. For the rest of us, we'll be waiting for reputable outlets like Rtings to conduct their standard through testing of this new feature!
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,679
They're still waiting on Low Frequency Compensation support and/or confirmation of Freesync2 support, which would mandate LFC. Would be nice if they do!


[also, making a comparison to the new G-Sync displays is a bit off, as they're running up to 144Hz and generally present the best you could possibly get for desktop gaming use]
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,554
They're still waiting on Low Frequency Compensation support and/or confirmation of Freesync2 support, which would mandate LFC. Would be nice if they do!


[also, making a comparison to the new G-Sync displays is a bit off, as they're running up to 144Hz and generally present the best you could possibly get for desktop gaming use]


Not to mention that Freesync on the PC is AMD only, and if you are running at 4k, no AMD GPU exists that can provide enough performance...

I definitely prefer open standards like Freesync to Nvidia's monopoly/world domination attempts with their closed standards, but if I cant get sufficient performance out of a configuration, I'm going to have to skip it. :(
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,679
If it were just an 'open standard/closed standard' thing, sure- but G-Sync is a superior implementation overall, and as stated on the PC, AMD hasn't bothered to really compete in that space anyway.

However, this is a pretty big win for console gamers!
 

jnemesh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
1,084
FreeSync sounds awesome. Hopefully someday AMD will make a card worth buying.

They did, they are called "Vega". Note that 120hz is only available for 1080p and 1440p, 4k over 60hz requires HDMI 2.1, which isn't available yet on anything.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,554
computer monitors are a rip off

You are free to go without. :p

Honestly though, unless you are looking for large, high resolution or high refresh panels they can be quite affordable. Decent monitors for typical office use (24", 1080p, 60hz) can be had for under $100.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,554
They did, they are called "Vega". Note that 120hz is only available for 1080p and 1440p, 4k over 60hz requires HDMI 2.1, which isn't available yet on anything.

Vega is absolute garbage. Falls behind a cheaper 1080 in almost everything.

Yes, HDMI does not currently support really high resolution and high refresh rates, but displayport does...
 

nightanole

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 16, 2003
Messages
2,031
Not to mention that Freesync on the PC is AMD only, and if you are running at 4k, no AMD GPU exists that can provide enough performance...

I definitely prefer open standards like Freesync to Nvidia's monopoly/world domination attempts with their closed standards, but if I cant get sufficient performance out of a configuration, I'm going to have to skip it. :(

Now now, remember its not "freesync", most are just applying the "adaptivesync" standard and calling it "freesync" which IS an AMD certification. So technically AMD could just not play nice and go after everyone who slaps freesync on their product, when its no where near in compliance. Then they would be more evil like nvidia.

It would be like back in the day everyone slapping "centrino" on their notebooks just because they are at least using the same cpu or chipset as a ceritfied intel centrino plateform.

At least amd doubled down on freesync2, and point blank said you cant call it freesync2 and have it only freesync +-10hz.
 

nightanole

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 16, 2003
Messages
2,031
Vega is absolute garbage. Falls behind a cheaper 1080 in almost everything.

Yes, HDMI does not currently support really high resolution and high refresh rates, but displayport does...

Right now hdmi 2.0 and DP 1.2 are pretty much the same in terms of bandwidth. Neither is getting above 4k 72hz. Once the new ones come out, both again will support 32.4 Gbit/s+ and do 4k 200hz with "no tricks". Technically you can do close to that now with DP 1.4, but NOTHING supports the weird lossless compression, and you needs gods gift to cables and have it be less than 2m in order for it to not sparkle.
 

MMitch

Gawd
Joined
Nov 29, 2016
Messages
807
Vega is absolute garbage. Falls behind a cheaper 1080 in almost everything.

Yes, HDMI does not currently support really high resolution and high refresh rates, but displayport does...

2700X + Vega 64 vs 8700K + 1080, they both trade blows if you ask me and even with a lesser gaming CPU ;)


NOTE: I only looked at the results quickly in the video, feel free to point me better points...
 

jnemesh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
1,084
Vega is absolute garbage. Falls behind a cheaper 1080 in almost everything.

Yes, HDMI does not currently support really high resolution and high refresh rates, but displayport does...

I disagree. Vega is a perfectly capable card that competes with everything except the very top end sku from Nvidia. And, being as the Vega supports FreeSync, it will work much better than an Nvidia product with the televisions being discussed here.

Also note, with a waterblock and some tweaking, the Vega 64 will outperform the GTX 1080.

2nd note, who cares what is supported on displayport? The TVs being discussed don't have displayport. HDMI only.
 

jnemesh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
1,084
Now now, remember its not "freesync", most are just applying the "adaptivesync" standard and calling it "freesync" which IS an AMD certification. So technically AMD could just not play nice and go after everyone who slaps freesync on their product, when its no where near in compliance. Then they would be more evil like nvidia.

It would be like back in the day everyone slapping "centrino" on their notebooks just because they are at least using the same cpu or chipset as a ceritfied intel centrino plateform.

At least amd doubled down on freesync2, and point blank said you cant call it freesync2 and have it only freesync +-10hz.

This is specifically marketed as FreeSync. They also specifically call out the generic HDMI label "VRR". Also, FreeSync is an open standard. AMD doesn't charge royalties for it.
 
Last edited:

ccityinstaller

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
4,241
Do you seriously own a Titan Xp with a 3930K? I'd think you aren't coming close to utilizing it fully. Just askin.

Just waiting for him to drop in and post the picture of his 4k tv and desk setup that I have seen well over 100 times in the last year ...
 

noko

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
6,836
Maybe Nvidia should just support FreeSync (Adaptive Sync) vice their proprietary crap. Real experience difference between FreeSync and GSync for most is non-existent. The price difference is. If Nvidia really cared so much about their customers and gaming in general they would allow you to choose either one. Nvidia well knows that if they support FreeSync very few would bother with GSync and those that would proclaim the superiority of GSync would be scorned on paying the hefty price addition, limited monitor selection for virtually nothing.
 

rgMekanic

[H]ard|News
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
6,233
If Nvidia really cared so much about their customers

ha..


hahaha..

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA

laugh.gif
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,554
Do you seriously own a Titan Xp with a 3930K? I'd think you aren't coming close to utilizing it fully. Just askin.

My 3930k is plenty fast for any modern title. I have never been CPU limited, which is why I haven't bothered to upgrade yet.

Granted, it's been running at between 4.6-4.8 GHz (depending on which settings I choose, compared to stock at 3.2). It keeps up with way newer CPU's.

Also, what works in my favor is that I target 60fps at 4k. I'm not one of those high refresh obsessed people. At 60hz, the CPU doesn't get hit very hard, but at ultra settings my overclocked Pascal Titan X on water is by far the bottleneck. It is not even close. I would se no benefit at all from a newer CPU.

Even if I got a Titan V I don't think I'd benefit from a faster CPU at 4k ultra settings.

If I ran at lower resolution and was gunning for high refresh rates, I'm pretty sure the CPU would hold me back, but that's not what I do.

Edit:

Jesus Herbert Walker Typos
 
Last edited:

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,554
Maybe Nvidia should just support FreeSync (Adaptive Sync) vice their proprietary crap. Real experience difference between FreeSync and GSync for most is non-existent. The price difference is. If Nvidia really cared so much about their customers and gaming in general they would allow you to choose either one. Nvidia well knows that if they support FreeSync very few would bother with GSync and those that would proclaim the superiority of GSync would be scorned on paying the hefty price addition, limited monitor selection for virtually nothing.

This would be nice. Support both, and let G-Sync compete based on it's merits, not based on the Monopoly power associated with being the only tech supported by the leading discrete GPU maker.

Using dominance in one market to force dominance in another is an explicit violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, and if you recall exactly how Microsoft got itself in trouble back in the day...
 

Shmee

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 12, 2014
Messages
1,148
microsoft at work

If their work is bringing good free features to TVs, that is pretty rad! Especially considering their is nothing stopping Sony from adding FreeSync to the PS4.
 

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,948
AMD hasn't bothered to really compete in that space anyway.

However, this is a pretty big win for console gamers!

You keep saying this and it's wrong. They compete in performance with anything but a Ti level card. Aka 95%+ of the market.

This is a big win for every gamer and will be more pressure on nvidia to enable VRR via driver updates.
 

Patton187

Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
669
I have gsync and dont really notice too much difference. I suppose that is the point though.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,679
You keep saying this and it's wrong. They compete in performance with anything but a Ti level card. Aka 95%+ of the market.

Vega competes with the 980Ti- the 1080 is more efficient. They are that far behind, where the 1080 is about to be replaced and AMD has nothing ready.

The 1160 will compete with Vega before AMD can compete with the 1080Ti.
 

jnemesh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
1,084
Vega competes with the 980Ti- the 1080 is more efficient. They are that far behind, where the 1080 is about to be replaced and AMD has nothing ready.

The 1160 will compete with Vega before AMD can compete with the 1080Ti.

They aren't as far behind as you seem to think, and they have 7nm Vegas sampling NOW. Considering the increased performance we saw with the Ryzen node shift, I think you are underestimating AMD by quite a bit. I am sure they have a talented team of engineers who know far more than you do as a USER.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,679
They aren't as far behind as you seem to think, and they have 7nm Vegas sampling NOW. Considering the increased performance we saw with the Ryzen node shift, I think you are underestimating AMD by quite a bit.

...which is purported to be about as fast as Vega, and will arrive after the 1180's hit. Which is what you quoted me saying. Further, I almost never underestimate AMD. AMD makes sure that underestimating them is quite difficult.

I am sure they have a talented team of engineers who know far more than you do as a USER.

Really no need for personal attacks, especially those that apply equally to yourself.
 

jnemesh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
1,084
...which is purported to be about as fast as Vega, and will arrive after the 1180's hit. Which is what you quoted me saying. Further, I almost never underestimate AMD. AMD makes sure that underestimating them is quite difficult.



Really no need for personal attacks, especially those that apply equally to yourself.

Only a personal attack if you took it as such. And your passive/aggressive deflection isn't needed either. My POINT is that you have no way of knowing how Nvidia's unannounced card will compete with AMD's unannounced card. And your loyalty to a massive corporation that cares nothing for it's customers is misguided at best.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,679
My POINT is that you have no way of knowing how Nvidia's unannounced card will compete with AMD's unannounced card.

I'm simply applying trends.

I'd prefer to be surprised by AMD; I know better than to hope for it.
 
Top