this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2024
329 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

58138 readers
4364 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Back in 2013, Nvidia introduced a new technology called G-Sync to eliminate screen tearing and stuttering effects and reduce input lag when playing PC games. The company accomplished this by tying your display's refresh rate to the actual frame rate of the game you were playing, and similar variable refresh-rate (VRR) technology has become a mainstay even in budget monitors and TVs today.

The issue for Nvidia is that G-Sync isn't what has been driving most of that adoption. G-Sync has always required extra dedicated hardware inside of displays, increasing the costs for both users and monitor manufacturers. The VRR technology in most low-end to mid-range screens these days is usually some version of the royalty-free AMD FreeSync or the similar VESA Adaptive-Sync standard, both of which provide G-Sync's most important features without requiring extra hardware. Nvidia more or less acknowledged that the free-to-use, cheap-to-implement VRR technologies had won in 2019 when it announced its "G-Sync Compatible" certification tier for FreeSync monitors. The list of G-Sync Compatible screens now vastly outnumbers the list of G-Sync and G-Sync Ultimate screens.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 15 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

This is why I think eventually FSR will win over DLSS in the end, despite DLSS having better performance.

[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 6 points 4 weeks ago

Nvidia solutions only get abandoned when a superior technology takes over. See PhysX.

[–] hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I think it's unlikely one of those techs "wins" at all. It's relatively easy to support them all from a software perspective and so gamers will just use whichever corresponds to their GPU.

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago

Unless something has changed recently you still have to submit builds to Nvidia to have them train the DLSS kernel for you, so FSR is substantially easier to integrate.