Neither HDMI 2.1 nor Freesync 2 are finished yet. Scorpio is essentially working with a moving target not unlike PS4 Pro did with HDMI 2.0 and HDR. So it will take time until compatible displays without kinks release.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Project Scorpio supports FreeSync and next-gen HDMI
- Thread starter mocoworm
- Start date
I don't think developers are going to unlock games from 30 so a handful can get the advantages of freesync from 30-40fps, unless it's a setting that can be toggled on/off. To my knowledge, there is no adaptive sync below 30fps, either. The input lag is a good point.
dr_rus
Member
DX12 have exactly zero in common with Mantle besides the base idea of the API which wasn't new in Mantle either as it was used in console APIs since PS2 era. Try again?
That's what LFC (low framerate compensation) is for that is regularly mentioned. It works by repeating the frames until it reaches the rate the display can show. Assuming the display can show frequencies between 30 and 75hz, a temporary rate of 28hz would be doubled to 56hz so it falls within the displayable frequencies.
If you say that they all aren't actually new implementations we do agree and can end it there. =P
BryanGT
Member
I think a some devs will push a Scorpio update for their games just to get a little lift out of an otherwise stagnating revenue stream. It doesn't take a lot of effort.
Shit, I'd pay upwards of $10 for some of my favorite games to get the higher res texture assets and updated render settings.
EA,MS, if you're reading this. He's totally kidding.
Please don't let them monetize basic-ass PC settings
BryanGT
Member
Yeah I shouldn't give anybody any stupid ideas. But I get that bandwidth, QA, and title updates cost money; and I'd be willing to share the cost (on an ad hoc basis) for certain games to be more beautiful.
The titles that will do it for free will probably be the ones that have the lowest attach rates.
I don't think it would be difficult for developers to have the game lock to 30 with V-Sync or unlocked with a VRR display connected.
There have also been console games in the past which gave you the option to unlock the framerate, even without VRR displays.
It could even be a system-level option instead of leaving it up to developers.
Low Framerate Compensation handles this if your display's maximum refresh rate is ≥2.5x the minimum.
If the minimum is 40Hz and the framerate drops to 39 FPS, it will be displayed at 78Hz instead.
VRR displays - or at least G-Sync displays - are required to be flicker-free, so that should be indistinguishable from a native 39Hz refresh.
Native support would be ideal though; there can be some minor issues from repeating frames like this.
That's why I hope that OLED panels can support lower minimum refresh rates than LCDs. The problem with LCD panels is that they fade to white if you don't refresh them often enough.
For anything but a trivial game it's impossible to guarantee that it takes a fixed amount of time to render what's happening on screen. The only way modern games achieve a constant frame rate is by making sure the vast majority of the time you spend no more than your budgeted time, but for less complex frames that means you get done faster still and waste CPU and GPU time idling between frames.
Even when games do hit their targets, the nature of a fixed refresh rate means that the game has no choice but to aim for 60fps or something that divides 60 evenly like 30, 20, or 15. You can't run at a nice, smooth 45fps, 50fps, 80fps or any other figure without some kind of variable refresh rate setup.
Because Sony have tried to distance themselves from this feature, and have repeatedly stated they don't want generations to carry over, I'd assume the technical undertaking is enormous especially with continuing online services, let alone the costs. They'd also need to make sure VR will carry over, does that mean support for all the other VR rated hardware? Will that impose a bunch of needless hardware that'll be redundant for next gen? It doesn't seem like a headache Sony want to deal with, it's easier to start again, but when the time is right.
Prototype Viktor
Member
Unless this comes out so late in the year then you get hit with the first run price hike
The Futurist
Member
Hmm.
They really seem to be hitting it out of the park with this thing huh?
Phil Spencer is the man Xbox needed from the start. Hope he leads the charge for many years to come.
That goofball Mattrick and this damn kinect almost ruined everything.
They really seem to be hitting it out of the park with this thing huh?
Phil Spencer is the man Xbox needed from the start. Hope he leads the charge for many years to come.
That goofball Mattrick and this damn kinect almost ruined everything.
VincentMatts
Member
Well, he ruined any momentum MS had coming out of xbox 360. So thats kinda like ruining everything. They basically had to start over from scratch, while the console was out with xbox one. Just one big unqualified goofball.
If the Xbox One's hardware was as well designed as the PS4's it might all have worked out for Mattrick.
Kinect was something that set the Xbox One apart from Nintendo and Sony and potentially would have pulled in broader audiences over Xbone's lifetime. Microsoft even had the better exclusives year one.
No matter the success of Scorpio, Microsoft has nothing to win back a more casual crowd. No, games, no peripherals, nothing. Pure speculation on my part, but that would be what the Xbox division needs to escape budget cut after budget cut and deliver value to Microsoft.
In that regard the One S was probably a bigger win than Scorpio.
Er, i don't recall them saying they dont want generations to carry over any software or ecosystem of the previous one. All i recall is Cerny saying in terms of hardware, a clean upgrade with new software is what they consider generational jumps.
This. I'm an exclusive PC gamer but we need moves like this so that PC gaming on TVs with adaptive sync will become a reality.
I can't go back to gaming on a screen less than 40 inches tbh.
Fredrik
Member
That's how it is on PC, I'm not so sure people are ready for that just yet.
I'd say that it's all about the money. I'll most likely buy a Scorpio. Lets say that it costs $449 as lots of people seem to think, XB1 launched a year later in Sweden so if this generation ends late 2019 I will have payed roughly $900 for 5 years of Xbox gaming.
Unfortunately I kind of like Sonys games too. And if I can't stand playing subpar versions of the games that got me to buy the PS4 in the first place I'll have to buy a PS4 Pro too. That's another $800 for 6 years of Playstation gaming.
That's easily on the same level as PC gaming in total cost (minus the initial investment).
And you're talking about yearly upgrades? Ouch.
The thing is, the difference compared to PC, and this is _very_ important, is that you can always tweak the games on PC to run on your old hardware. On console you can't do that. If a dev think that 20fps is perfectly fine on PS4 when PS4 Pro 3 launches then that's what you'll get. Enjoy your 20fps, or buy a new console. On PC you would just scale things down and still run the game at a decent framerate and upgrade when you have the money for it rather than when the devs force you to do it.
So if upgrades and forward compatibility becomes the norm then consoles need to have that video settings menu that I've been requesting since like forever. Then I'd be perfectly fine with yearly upgrades, then it would be my own choice how important those extra details and effects really are that I might have to deactivate. Right now it's a mess, with enough complaining on the boards we might get a patch which makes a game run smoother, but we have no choice in what gets removed to achieve the smoother framerate, sometimes they remove stuff that some people wanted and the complaining continues, eventually they might get it right and everybody is happy but it's a rare situation.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Yep. Specs change all the time.
Did they drop HDMI 2.1 support?
From the website:
It never had HDMI 2.1 support, just support for the HDMI 2.1 VRR implementation
from Eurogamer's original article:
"On the display output, of course, HDMI 2.0 - we need that for the additional frame-rate for 4K and also HDR and the wide colour gamut," says Nick Baker
the article in the OP only claims "To cut a long story short, Scorpio supports AMD's FreeSync - and the upcoming variable refresh rate support baked into the next-gen HDMI 2.1 spec."
That's an announcement, not the actual spec.
Unless you are a member of the HDMI org and pay the associated licensing fees, etc. this is about as close as you will get. They do not make all the info available to the public.
SuicideUZI
Member
Does this mean if there is ever a Gsync monitor with HDMI 2.1 it would support both Gsync and Freesync?
They haven't made it available to anyone, is the point. What you linked to is an announcement that they would make it available to manufacturers at some point this quarter. It was since delayed.
The information linked is available to everyone. It does make clear quite a few expectations.
No doubt there will be a final refinement, they have said as much. I have not seen an official announcement of delay, and Q2 is not quite over yet. Regardless, what has already been outlined is a clear direction for what to expect with HDMI 2.1 - and its a big one.
Marty Chinn
Member
Ya, but in a real world practical sense, what does the Xbox One X gain from being 2.1 compliant over 2.0b in it's lifespan window?
Most likely not too much in the next 2 years - longer term, 3-5 years out we have potential for higher res, higher bit depth video streaming.
Edit: immediate benefit could be 4K with HDR and RGB 444 due to increased BW.
Marty Chinn
Member
By the time there is any realistic practical uses in 3 to 5 years, we'll be moving on to the next generation Xbox and PlayStation. Not having 2.1 in the Xbox One X isn't really going to do anything, especially since you'll need a new TV to utilize it anyway. This really just shouts more of on paper checklist items than real world benefit. Now if the next Xbox and PlayStation then don't use 2.1, then I think there will be a valid complaint.
dr_rus
Member
No, because HDMI's VRR is not Freesync.
Theonik
Member
It never had HDMI 2.1 support that was just speculation.
This is also not true. They said it supported Freesync which is not HDMI VRR.
They have released a draft spec but it is not final and compliance tests aren't released yet.
It is irresponsible to promise 2.1 compatibility at this juncture.
No, they also said "and the upcoming variable refresh rate support baked into the next-gen HDMI 2.1 spec."
The spec sheet they released also says this:
Similar threads
- Locked