Nvidia's G-SYNC tech to allow native refresh rates in MAME ?

[Fudoh]

Nvidia today announced G-SYNC.

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articl ... ree-gaming

http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/18/nvidia-g-sync/

Seems to be a driver module for monitors which allows the display to sync to variable output refresh rates without the need to lock some kind of 60Hz signal. It's obviously meant for FPS gaming to eliminate v-sync issues (lag and refresh rate restrictions), while eliminating tearing 100% and driving the monitor with the game's variable native refresh rate.

Obvisouly I'm not interested in FPS or other PC gaming extravaganza, but thinking a bit further, I see GREAT potential for MAME in this new tech. It would finally allow to play all games in their native refresh rates, original speed without any tearing. Think DoDonPachi without speedup or tearing or R-Type at it's original 55Hz.

Very promising! For now unfortunately just for cheap-ass TN displays, but in the long run I don't see why the tech shouldn't come to IPS panels as well.

[alamone]

While I think the concept itself is great, I'm not sure if it really provides anything new for MAME.
Some builds can already change the v-sync output rate to match the actual game rate.
Sure it's a different matter whether your LCD accepts the signal or not, and G-sync would certainly eliminate those problems,
but if you outputted to a CRT or LCD that has a wide sync range already, I don't see any benefit besides maybe reduced lag.

[Fudoh]

Currently CRTs are your only option. Even with LCDs, which accept a wider range of refresh rates, you're always facing an internal framerate conversion.

If you have ever tried to run a game like R-Type or Raiden Fighters on a LCD, you know that it's always been a lost cause. I find this revolutionary. Maybe not in it's current form, but I see this becoming standard tech really fast. Three years from now ? In every major display!

[blizzz]

For now unfortunately just for cheap-ass TN displays

I wouldn't call the VG248QE a cheap-ass TN. I'm still amazed by the display. I'm kinda interested in buying the mod kit, but losing the DVI input would be unacceptable for me :/

I hope that this will become a standard feature in gaming monitors and won't be limited to NVIDIA. LightBoost is also pretty nice, and that works with AMD too. Don't see why G-Sync wouldn't work with AMD.

[Fudoh]

yeah, sorry 'bout the VG248QE. You know what I meant. I don't see this coming to "classic" 60Hz anytime soon, although the IPS panels would easily be able to produce higher refresh rates (TVs do it). Will be limited to those 120/144Hz TN sets.

Does HDMI/DVI generally get disabled once the kit is installed. From the news site I read (german) I had the impression that the G-Sync module is just limited to the display port input, but HDMI and DVI of course remain available for other sources.

[Lord of Pirates]

For now unfortunately just for cheap-ass TN displays

I wouldn't call the VG248QE a cheap-ass TN. I'm still amazed by the display. I'm kinda interested in buying the mod kit, but losing the DVI input would be unacceptable for me :/

I hope that this will become a standard feature in gaming monitors and won't be limited to NVIDIA. LightBoost is also pretty nice, and that works with AMD too. Don't see why G-Sync wouldn't work with AMD.

The second second article mentions that it's for nVidia cards with Kepler, for now at least.

[blizzz]

There's a chart on your first link that makes it look like the DVI + HDMI inputs get removed by the mod.

Maybe we'll see 120Hz gaming monitors with IPS panel and G-Sync in 1-3 years. Would be a welcome step up.

Edit: Maybe that pic isn't the best source. The monitor doesn't even support VGA to begin with, only DVI-D, which they don't mention.

[brownvim]

I was reading about this yesterday, I think it's revolutionary. You reckon this could also eliminate the lag associated with most emulators? No need to buffer frames anymore.

[lettuce]

What are the chances (not sure if its even technically possible) for this device to be offered as a module that you place between your current monitor and GPU??

[Fudoh]

none. it needs to fit directly at the panel and the panel has to support all possible refresh rates natively.

[BuckoA51]

Nice, except I Mame/PC game on a 40" HDTV. Seriously, who plays PC games on a monitor any more? Hopefully this will come to some larger displays one day too.

[Sixfortyfive]

Nice, except I Mame/PC game on a 40" HDTV. Seriously, who plays PC games on a monitor any more? Hopefully this will come to some larger displays one day too.

Not only do I play PC games on a monitor, but I play console games on a monitor as well.

[ZellSF]

Nice, except I Mame/PC game on a 40" HDTV. Seriously, who plays PC games on a monitor any more?

Me, and most likely the majority of PC gamers.

I considered making a topic about this in off-topic, since this is mostly made for PC gaming. If I weren't too lazy I'd make a separate topic since it's amazing news for PC gamers. Really guaranteed that I need to replace my monitor within 2 years again. Sure 144hz + vsync + triple buffering + 144fps frame limiter is pretty damn good, but there's still some input lag and when the framerate drops it really hurts.

For emulators, I imagine most of them needs to actually code support for this. Well support for outputting native refresh rate. One sync issue less to worry about definitely sounds promising for emulators.

[Lord of Pirates]

Nice, except I Mame/PC game on a 40" HDTV. Seriously, who plays PC games on a monitor any more? Hopefully this will come to some larger displays one day too.

I tried playing PC games on an HDTV and it felt wrong to me, too many years spent hunched in front of a monitor I suppose .

[Ed Oscuro]

This is one of those moves whose non-appearance over the last few years was always a mystery. Display and video card manufacturers seemed to have a reason to get together long before now to truly take advantage of digital connections and the variable refresh rate of monitors.

With any luck the Overlord Tempest monitors will be a direct replacement for what I've got right now (and it'd be nice to finally get a digital connection and finally do away with the analog one I've been suffering the past couple years). Never heard of them before this but it looks like they have a great lineup - 1440p will be great if I can adjust to the slightly higher resolution, and if there are good enough on-screen controls to allow centering and aspect ratio-correct stretching (as it should).

[BuckoA51]

Me, and most likely the majority of PC gamers.

Seriously, PC games are so much better on a lovely big screen, with a surround sound system. Playing them on a monitor?! That's like getting a blu-ray player then hooking it to the little TV in your bedroom.

Anyway, I wonder if such technology could be built into an upscaler, so we could have exact matching refresh rates for retro consoles too?

[blizzz]

Seriously, PC games are so much better on a lovely big screen, with a surround sound system. Playing them on a monitor?! That's like getting a blu-ray player then hooking it to the little TV in your bedroom.

Most competitive games work best on smaller screens, otherwise you lose the overview. Surround sound works perfectly fine with good headphones and virtual surround (Dolby Headphone). Also, using keyboard and mouse on your couch is a very weird concept for me.
For console-like games (racing, platformer etc.) I fully agree that TVs are the better option. There are some Smart TVs that can be upgraded with new CPUs etc (at least that's what I heard), so offering a G-Sync add-on card for TVs would be nice too. I doubt that we will see TVs with this tech built-in anytime soon. All classic devices that output to a TV (video player, consoles) have a fixed framerate.

Anyway, I wonder if such technology could be built into an upscaler, so we could have exact matching refresh rates for retro consoles too?

I don't see why not, but Micomsoft would need to license the tech and build a new upscaler (or maybe a firmware update for the Framemeister would be enough?). It all depends on weather G-Sync will be a niche feature or mainstream in the future.

[Ed Oscuro]

It would be odd and possibly painful for some to try and write a paper on a TV, I think, because peoples' eyes are adapted to looking at things closely for many millennia now. This is similar to blizzz's comment, but I think there may be some physiological component - imagine looking at something in your hand versus looking out at the horizon. Both have their uses, and while you can easily forget that you are focusing on something near or far, it might still be pleasing to have the right fit for the task.

Beyond that, there's still probably a few issues that would prevent a large TV from being as good as a PC monitor - if the TV is larger, color and lighting uniformity is going to be harder to achieve. Right now LED lighting is in its infancy and we don't have many panels with monolithic backlight arrays (let alone affordable ones). Of course, there is also always going to be better economy in building smaller panels, too, although I'm not sure exactly how that relates to the lag of resolution in many HDTVs compared with that of the best monitors - I think the gap has all but closed with commonplace 1080p TVs.

I would definitely like to have the flexibility of using a TV with whatever system I have, but I don't see myself replacing a traditional PC monitor either, and I expect to be able to game on a monitor as well.

I hope the benefits of G-Sync are adopted by the mainstream; we might have a competing solution. The best possibility would be that nVidia licenses the technology to all comers or makes it an open standard. I also hope that the signalling between components won't be an impediment to compatibility between devices that don't both have G-Sync.

[matrigs]

Anyway, I wonder if such technology could be built into an upscaler, so we could have exact matching refresh rates for retro consoles too?

I don't see why not, but Micomsoft would need to license the tech and build a new upscaler (or maybe a firmware update for the Framemeister would be enough?). It all depends on weather G-Sync will be a niche feature or mainstream in the future.

What would that do? The scaler would still have to output 60hz (or whatever else is supported by the connected screen).

I'm curious if this actually allows fractional framerates to be displayed, like 55.75 hz for Dodonpachi etc.

One thing about this chart bugs me though:



Those fixed "2d refresh rates". What's that about?

[BuckoA51]

Most competitive games work best on smaller screens, otherwise you lose the overview.

Think we'll have to agree to differ, nothing beats Trackmania 2 or even Unreal Tournament on a lovely big TV. I grew up with parents who were convinced that a 14 inch portable TV gave the best picture so maybe that explains my attitude to big screens now. I did used to play World of Warcraft at my desk because there's so much waiting around in that game it was kinda convenient to window it and run stuff on the other monitors to pass the time. Since 1080p TV's with great picture quality though I even play RTS on the big screen and I've not noticed my scores/frag counts etc drop, not that they were spectacular to begin with, (tbh I mostly play single player games now).

It would be odd and possibly painful for some to try and write a paper on a TV

Yes of course I still do all my work at my desk on a Dell SP2039W (which has terrible colour compared to my TV), and a pair of old Samsung 1600x1200 monitors.

What would that do? The scaler would still have to output 60hz (or whatever else is supported by the connected screen).

Potentially fix problems with systems like Neo Geo or PAL systems in 60hz mode where the refresh is enough out of spec that a normal monitor cannot sync to it.

[Ed Oscuro]

Those fixed "2d refresh rates". What's that about?

I assume that's for the traditional 2D mode, i.e., not this:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d-vision-main.html

[Fudoh]

I think it's actually for the standard Windows Desktop modes which don't utilize the Direct3D or OGL sections of the card.

[Ed Oscuro]

I think it's actually for the standard Windows Desktop modes which don't utilize the Direct3D or OGL sections of the card.

I thought about that but it doesn't make sense to me, unless the idea is only that 2D applications won't have variable frame rates...a lamentable mistake if true. One reason I discarded this out of hand was that the 2D / 3D distinction on Desktop/3D modes is based around optimizations on compositing and power savings, but as far as I know (knew?) that doesn't have any impact on the signal going out, or the display's energy use. I could see, looking at the range of power inputs cited by their page having a lower floor and a higher ceiling than the monitor without G-Sync, that perhaps they've tweaked 2D mode here for slightly lower energy use, but how that could work is still mysterious to me.

Yes of course I still do all my work at my desk on a Dell SP2039W (which has terrible colour compared to my TV)

I've got the reverse situation. I'm sure some people would be flabbergasted by the saturated "vivid" color profiles on many TVs, but my own desktop monitor has relatively accurate profiles and a nice wide gamut far ahead of most TVs.

The only other thing to talk about here is viewing distance, I suppose, since sitting a ways from a TV will allow your eyes to move no more than you would with a monitor closer up. Perhaps being able to focus on something slightly farther away (allowing the avoidance of nearsighted eyestrain) is a plus; I don't know. Beyond this, TVs don't really have an advantage over monitors if you're sitting so you have the same field of view from where you sit (and for that I'd rather have the convenience of a monitor which doesn't need to be set up for different inputs like a TV does). I have to sit very close to a TV in order to attain that same field of view. Sitting farther from the screen is okay for some kinds of gaming but if noticing small details matters, a closer seat makes sense.

[blizzz]

What would that do? The scaler would still have to output 60hz (or whatever else is supported by the connected screen).

That's why both the display and the scaler would need G-Sync support.

Those fixed "2d refresh rates". What's that about?

I assume that's for the traditional 2D mode, i.e., not this:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d-vision-main.html

Yes, that's what it is. 60 to 144 Hz works in "normal" mode. If you switch to NVidia 3D Vision (that includes the LightBoost hack even though that's in 2D), you're limited to 100 or 120Hz.

[Ed Oscuro]

The strange thing is that according to their list 3D mode supports 85Hz in addition to the four modes 2D mode is listed supporting.

Of course, according to all the descriptions of G-SYNC(TM) in action, four or even five modes is not accurate at all - the description seems to more than imply a sliding refresh rate depending on when frames are ready to be sent. Very strange.

[blizzz]

One problem I can see, is that the colors on the VG248QE change with the refresh rate. 144Hz has a nice warm feel that is close to my IPS. 120Hz is more neutral / blue and doesn't look great. The colors in 60Hz are close to 144Hz, but there's a noticeable flickering from the backlight. A variable refresh rate could possibly affect the colors and flickering too. But that's a problem of this monitor.

[Endymion]

Anyway, I wonder if such technology could be built into an upscaler, so we could have exact matching refresh rates for retro consoles too?

There is very little chance of that right now. This technology absolutely requires that both the sending and receiving devices communicate with one another both ways, so there is no way that one device supporting it will solve the issue. Historically, television displays have been used for, well, television, and while they can display games, it has functioned without this tech even when considering the lag and image tears and artifacts introduced. The people who care about that issue set about great lengths to work around the problem on their own, which doesn't amount to a great deal more than minimising the issue, while everyone else is oblivious. Television and film viewing do not require this technology at all, so it never mattered because people who only use TVs for this didn't know about the problem. A consortium or an alliance of corporations would have to come together on this to agree on it as a standard method in order for anything to take place in this way. If Nvidia's solution makes enough of a difference, and if it is demanded enough from those who need it (gamers) then it's a possibility.

[Ed Oscuro]

Yes, of course both the output device and the display must both support the technology, but there is no obvious tech barrier so long as the upscaler outputs using G-SYNC.

The only obvious problem here is that hardware being upscaled might possibly not output a consistent frame rate, but I don't think that is a problem for most games. All that should be necessary is frame locking according to a detected frame rate in most all games. Most of these arcade and console games have slowdown (keeping the same number of frames in a set frame rate: It takes longer to see the same number of frames at the same rate because the game takes longer to display them) instead of frame skipping (as seen in PC multiplayer online games where there is no possibility of using slowdown, because you must stay synchronized with an external source; of course PC titles in general used this strategy before online games as a way of dealing with giving consistent feel across different hardware platforms).

If my understanding of the technology is correct, most of the cost and complexity comes on the display side, where G-SYNC needs to directly control the display. But on the output device side, it essentially only seems to be dictating what the refresh rate will be - all it needs to know is perhaps the range of frame rates supported in the device. So if nVidia get the cost down to $100 - they are talking about that currently expensive $175 chip for use in monitors. They are pulling a bit of a PhysX fast one here as usual - they don't want to disabuse people of the notion that you can use this technology without a $600 graphics card, but unlike PhysX it seems to be even less true here. If we want to see this happen we need to push the case (assuming it turns out to be true) that this is something cheap to implement in an output device.

It certainly would make an upscaler more expensive, even if it is just a matter of licensing a way of handshaking between the device and the monitor, but given the market being targeted by users, money isn't really an object to get back even one frame of performance, let alone eliminating tearing. Even the $175 module seems like a reasonable cost. But of course nVidia will make that money anyway if the licensing is right. I just don't want the pricing to be thought of as prohibitive to introducing this, and I also don't want people paying $100+ premiums for support in non-nVidia branded (or non-graphics) products if the actual costs are far less.

nVidia so far have said that they explicitly aren't taking licensing out of the equation. Actually somebody ought to contact both parties here (Micomsoft and nVidia) and try to drum up some support for this issue. It might just be a wait-and-see thing; we might be talking about five years for the technology (or something like it) to be sufficiently mainstream.

What I am worried about, as ever, is that the new "big" consoles obviously aren't supporting this unless AMD licenses it or figures out a way to reverse engineer it into a software implementation for output.

[matrigs]

Television and film viewing do not require this technology at all

On the contrary.

It's a damn nightmare to configure a judder-free setup to watch ntsc 23.976p content on a tv. And for pc monitors (and some tv sets, too) you are stuck with 60 hz anyway.

But as this isn't going below 30 hz it won't address this matter anyway.

[Ed Oscuro]

It's true that it won't go below 30 Hz, but I think you missed the point if you're saying that this won't help 24Hz sources. All you need is a refresh rate that multiplies the 24Hz rate into a lowest common denominator shared by something the display can output. There's essentially no advantage to driving the panel at 24Hz instead of 120Hz in a hold-type display if you've eliminated tearing and other artifacts. With G-SYNC, if the floor is 30Hz, but 48Hz is within the range supported by the monitor, you've essentially solved this problem.

I should also point out that the rationale for stating there is flicker at 30Hz isn't known, at least not to me.