Will PCs become "upgradeable" consoles?
With the introduction of G-Sync we will soon face a scenario when changing graphic card to another manufacturer will cause the need of upgrading several other parts. Soon we will end up with PC N and PC A in which we would be able to upgrade certain parts from the same manufacturer (yeah I know that you can't put AMD on LGA but mobo/cpu is very different from graphic card/monitor combo) because changing the manufacturer would be too costly for most. Why is nvidia not trusting its customers and trying to force them to stay with their products? side note I'm being optimistic seeing that 3d vision support will be included in g-sync monitors http://3dvision-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/asus-vg248qe-with-gsync-specs-690x388.jpg
With the introduction of G-Sync we will soon face a scenario when changing graphic card to another manufacturer will cause the need of upgrading several other parts. Soon we will end up with PC N and PC A in which we would be able to upgrade certain parts from the same manufacturer (yeah I know that you can't put AMD on LGA but mobo/cpu is very different from graphic card/monitor combo) because changing the manufacturer would be too costly for most.

Why is nvidia not trusting its customers and trying to force them to stay with their products?

side note I'm being optimistic seeing that 3d vision support will be included in g-sync monitors http://3dvision-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/asus-vg248qe-with-gsync-specs-690x388.jpg

Acer H5360 / BenQ XL2420T + 3D Vision 2 Kit - EVGA GTX 980TI 6GB - i7-3930K@4.0GHz - DX79SI- 16GB RAM@2133 - Win10x64 Home - HTC VIVE

#1
Posted 10/22/2013 12:01 PM   
I personally don't really care. I jumped ship to Nvidia years ago and would only have more reason to stay as long as their stereo 3D technology is superior to AMD.
I personally don't really care. I jumped ship to Nvidia years ago and would only have more reason to stay as long as their stereo 3D technology is superior to AMD.

|CPU: i7-2700k @ 4.5Ghz
|Cooler: Zalman 9900 Max
|MB: MSI Military Class II Z68 GD-80
|RAM: Corsair Vengence 16GB DDR3
|SSDs: Seagate 600 240GB; Crucial M4 128GB
|HDDs: Seagate Barracuda 1TB; Seagate Barracuda 500GB
|PS: OCZ ZX Series 1250watt
|Case: Antec 1200 V3
|Monitors: Asus 3D VG278HE; Asus 3D VG236H; Samsung 3D 51" Plasma;
|GPU:MSI 1080GTX "Duke"
|OS: Windows 10 Pro X64

#2
Posted 10/22/2013 12:22 PM   
No, i think consoles had become a non-upgradeable PC´s...
No, i think consoles had become a non-upgradeable PC´s...

#3
Posted 10/22/2013 12:37 PM   
[quote="1Shoot-1Frag"]No, i think consoles had become a non-upgradeable PC´s... [/quote] oh lol true that
1Shoot-1Frag said:No, i think consoles had become a non-upgradeable PC´s...
oh lol true that

Acer H5360 / BenQ XL2420T + 3D Vision 2 Kit - EVGA GTX 980TI 6GB - i7-3930K@4.0GHz - DX79SI- 16GB RAM@2133 - Win10x64 Home - HTC VIVE

#4
Posted 10/22/2013 12:42 PM   
I don't look at this as a way of them forcing people to stay with their products and more of a way for their products to live up to their full potential, no one needs G-Sync ... just like no one needs LightBoost ... they aren't trying to corner the market with these technologies, they're just trying to make their corner of the market better than the rest. :)
I don't look at this as a way of them forcing people to stay with their products and more of a way for their products to live up to their full potential, no one needs G-Sync ... just like no one needs LightBoost ... they aren't trying to corner the market with these technologies, they're just trying to make their corner of the market better than the rest. :)
#5
Posted 10/22/2013 02:22 PM   
And I still don't see the difference between lightboost and max brightness xD
And I still don't see the difference between lightboost and max brightness xD

Model: Clevo P570WM Laptop
GPU: GeForce GTX 980M ~8GB GDDR5
CPU: Intel Core i7-4960X CPU +4.2GHz (12 CPUs)
Memory: 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3L 1600MHz, 4x8gb
OS: Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate

#6
Posted 10/22/2013 03:00 PM   
You are equipped to answer your own question, because what you describe is already exactly the case for us 3dvision users. We are required to stick with a monitor/gpu combo that supports 3dvision. And that keeps us in the Nvidia ecosystem. Does that make our PCs unupgradable? Not really. It just means that AMD have to work harder if they want to convince me to switch. Actually, I think gsync will make much less of a difference to being stuck in a particular ecosystem than the mobo/cpu situation does currently. Firstly - and this is a crucial point - a gsync monitor will work just fine with an AMD card, unlike an Intel mobo with an AMD cpu or vice versa. Secondly, if gsync really takes off, then I can see most/all monitors eventually incorporating it. If that happens, future AMD users will probably already own gsync monitors anyway (just like I own an hdmi-compliant monitor even though I don't use hdmi). Thirdly, you may be able to add gsync to your existing monitor with a cheap $100 DIY kit. That's a lot less than most mobos. I actually just spent about a grand this week to upgrade to Haswell (granted, I got a high-end CPU and high-end mobo obviously, or it would have been considerably cheaper) - you can be sure I won't dream of switching to an AMD system any time soon! TsabehT is totally right. Gsync doesn't force anything on anyone, since gsync monitors will never be required for games, and they'll be backwards compatible with non-gsync GPUs. If Nvidia spent years researching this as they claim, then they need to make a profit from it to get back those millions of R&D and wage dollars. If there was no promise of some sort of exclusivity, then they never would have bothered researching it, and we'd all be back at square one with static refresh rates. But anyway, AMD will probably be forced to come up with their own version of the tech. It may well turn out that future monitors come prequipped with both gsync and 'AMD-sync' capabilities. Similar to how motherboards nowadays allow for both SLI and CrossfireX.
You are equipped to answer your own question, because what you describe is already exactly the case for us 3dvision users. We are required to stick with a monitor/gpu combo that supports 3dvision. And that keeps us in the Nvidia ecosystem. Does that make our PCs unupgradable? Not really. It just means that AMD have to work harder if they want to convince me to switch.

Actually, I think gsync will make much less of a difference to being stuck in a particular ecosystem than the mobo/cpu situation does currently. Firstly - and this is a crucial point - a gsync monitor will work just fine with an AMD card, unlike an Intel mobo with an AMD cpu or vice versa.

Secondly, if gsync really takes off, then I can see most/all monitors eventually incorporating it. If that happens, future AMD users will probably already own gsync monitors anyway (just like I own an hdmi-compliant monitor even though I don't use hdmi).

Thirdly, you may be able to add gsync to your existing monitor with a cheap $100 DIY kit. That's a lot less than most mobos. I actually just spent about a grand this week to upgrade to Haswell (granted, I got a high-end CPU and high-end mobo obviously, or it would have been considerably cheaper) - you can be sure I won't dream of switching to an AMD system any time soon!

TsabehT is totally right. Gsync doesn't force anything on anyone, since gsync monitors will never be required for games, and they'll be backwards compatible with non-gsync GPUs.

If Nvidia spent years researching this as they claim, then they need to make a profit from it to get back those millions of R&D and wage dollars. If there was no promise of some sort of exclusivity, then they never would have bothered researching it, and we'd all be back at square one with static refresh rates.

But anyway, AMD will probably be forced to come up with their own version of the tech. It may well turn out that future monitors come prequipped with both gsync and 'AMD-sync' capabilities. Similar to how motherboards nowadays allow for both SLI and CrossfireX.

ImageVolnaPC.com - Tips, tweaks, performance comparisons (PhysX card, SLI scaling, etc)

#7
Posted 10/23/2013 10:49 PM   
[quote="Volnaiskra"] But anyway, AMD will probably be forced to come up with their own version of the tech. It may well turn out that future monitors come prequipped with both gsync and 'AMD-sync' capabilities. Similar to how motherboards nowadays allow for both SLI and CrossfireX. [/quote] That is about the size of it. Most optical drives are CD/DVD/Blueray compatible these days. So much for 'format wars'. Its all about marketing and creating 'value' or 'need' where there was none before. Do I need a light boost monitor? No. G-Sync? No. G-Sync might be nice to have if it ever migrates to 2-4K projectors but then I'd be waiting for the price of them to come down to reasonable 'consumer' level(s). Personally I'd be happy if Nvidia let us use the Quatro drivers with our high end consumer cards.
Volnaiskra said:
But anyway, AMD will probably be forced to come up with their own version of the tech. It may well turn out that future monitors come prequipped with both gsync and 'AMD-sync' capabilities. Similar to how motherboards nowadays allow for both SLI and CrossfireX.


That is about the size of it. Most optical drives are CD/DVD/Blueray compatible these days. So much for 'format wars'.

Its all about marketing and creating 'value' or 'need' where there was none before. Do I need a light boost monitor? No. G-Sync? No. G-Sync might be nice to have if it ever migrates to 2-4K projectors but then I'd be waiting for the price of them to come down to reasonable 'consumer' level(s).

Personally I'd be happy if Nvidia let us use the Quatro drivers with our high end consumer cards.

i7-2600K-4.5Ghz/Corsair H100i/8GB/GTX780SC-SLI/Win7-64/1200W-PSU/Samsung 840-500GB SSD/Coolermaster-Tower/Benq 1080ST @ 100"

#8
Posted 10/23/2013 11:58 PM   
Scroll To Top