Nobody at AMD will buy those, I guess? Since they're more expensive than Freesync / Freesync 2 screens anyway? Since I don't have a Freesync monitor, they do work via HDMI as well?

fantaskarsef:

Nobody at AMD will buy those, I guess? Since they're more expensive than Freesync / Freesync 2 screens anyway? Since I don't have a Freesync monitor, they do work via HDMI as well?

Yes they work with hdmi.

This feature made more sense for older gsync models not new ones.

At the end eveything will be compatible with everything... it should have been like that from the start. [QUOTE="fantaskarsef, post: 5735097, member: 258664"Since they're more expensive than Freesync / Freesync 2 screens anyway? Sadly not on every brand, as GSync monitor still sell well, some brand (that sell under 2 names and is one of the main in the world) milk AMD user with Freesync 2 monitor at the price of the full GSync monitor. Anyway if you don't pass 12H per Day gaming, it's better to get a good monitor than a medium one with Freesync or GSync for the same price...

Obviously display manufacturers would prefer GSync to have wider compatibility. Therefore, wondering if they did some sort of deal with Nvidia, which ultimately benefits them all, ie possibly reducing costs but gaining greater sales.

It seems some are confused and have completely forgot about the GSync buffer and frame repeating to make low FPS faster, that's done on the GSync module. Freesync 1 or 2 doesn't do this and to include GSync on everything, would make every monitor more expensive (great for nVidia stocks!). I believe with laptops with GSync, they usually don't have a GSync module and nVidia literally uses Adaptive Sync (Freesync) instead..

Nvidia is trying to buy good will ahead of time in case Intel and AMD corner them in the future.