Many More AMD FreeSync Monitors Are On The Way

[profoundWHALE]

"21:9 ultra-wide display"

Am I the only one who is REALLY getting sick of how monitors are getting wider and wider? It is difficult to find monitors with even a reasonable compromise now (16:10), and practically impossible to get a good proper 4:3 resolution.

Monitor manufacturers make a note: when you make the monitor wider, you kill actual usability by shrinking the usable space down to NOTHING by creating a relative NO HEIGHT ratio.

With the 34" model, you're looking at
34" diagonal
31.25" wide
13.39" tall

The 29" model:
29" diagonal
26.65" wide
11.43" tall

I have an ASUS 24" 16:9 for comparison.
24" diagonal
20.92" wide
11.77" tall

I Also did calculations for a 16:10 24" which would be
20.35" wide
12.72" tall

For another comparison, I'll do 27" 21:9
24.82" wide
10.64" tall

And 27" 2:1 (16:8)
24.15" wide
12.07" tall

27" 16:9
23.53" wide
13.24" tall

And 27" 16:10
22.9" wide
14.31" tall

And 27" 4:3 (16:12)
21.6" wide
16.2" tall

And finally 27" 1:1 (16:16)
19.09" wide
19.09" tall

This is also why I hate the display numbers. Now they can say words that sound cool, like
Them: 50" super-widescreen!!! OMGLOL THAT'S HUGE AND LOOK IT's chEAPER than the competitors.!
Me: Well duh, you're getting less overall pixels for the same diagonal size.

It's also why it's hard to find a cheap 'large' 4:3, because they are always more pixels for the diagonal size.

The only PRACTICAL way to work with a wide area, is dual monitors with a PHYSICAL separation between them that allows you to treat the two "halves" as being entirely separate.

I'd rather have a large widescreen with two 4:3 or 1:1 on either side

[vein]

Damn it. We will now have the choice between (seems to be cheaper) AMD freesync monitors and their pretty bad Linux drivers or (quite expensive) Nvidia G-sync monitors and their not so bad drivers ...

Actually, with 14.12 Catalyst isn't that bad. Working great for me in SL and Ubuntu. Actually I have no problems, I think people that use Gnome or Unity report having problems...I use KDE and it is very stable

[CrystalGamma]

"21:9 ultra-wide display"

Am I the only one who is REALLY getting sick of how monitors are getting wider and wider? It is difficult to find monitors with even a reasonable compromise now (16:10), and practically impossible to get a good proper 4:3 resolution.

Monitor manufacturers make a note: when you make the monitor wider, you kill actual usability by shrinking the usable space down to NOTHING by creating a relative NO HEIGHT ratio. The only PRACTICAL way to work with a wide area, is dual monitors with a PHYSICAL separation between them that allows you to treat the two "halves" as being entirely separate.

If the mount allows it, you can use the screen in portrait mode.
In my experience, 1080 pixels is enough horizontal space for a directory tree view and 120 columns of text, side by side, while even 1920 vertical pixels is PLENTY for text editing (coding especially).

[Qaz`]

If the mount allows it, you can use the screen in portrait mode.
In my experience, 1080 pixels is enough horizontal space for a directory tree view and 120 columns of text, side by side, while even 1920 vertical pixels is PLENTY for text editing (coding especially).

When you put a normal screen in portrait mode you lose horizontal subpixel rendering of fonts. The "extra 3x" resolution is of much more use horizontally than vertically for text. This will be of much less importance when we move over to 4k at 24", but 1080p at 24" is in (my opinion in) dire need of subpixel rendering.

That is if you like subpixel font rendering of course, some people don't. I have some kind of mental dissonance, I like my terminals with fix width bitmap fonts, but i demand subpixel for web, and fixed width with subpixel for coding.

[CrystalGamma]

When you put a normal screen in portrait mode you lose horizontal subpixel rendering of fonts. The "extra 3x" resolution is of much more use horizontally than vertically for text. This will be of much less importance when we move over to 4k at 24", but 1080p at 24" is in (my opinion in) dire need of subpixel rendering.

That is if you like subpixel font rendering of course, some people don't. I have some kind of mental dissonance, I like my terminals with fix width bitmap fonts, but i demand subpixel for web, and fixed width with subpixel for coding.

Most toolkits can be configured to use vertical subpixels.
I know that gnome-tweak-tool as well as the XFCE settings program have options for this.

[Qaz`]

Most toolkits can be configured to use vertical subpixels.
I know that gnome-tweak-tool as well as the XFCE settings program have options for this.

Yes, but vertical subpixel rendering is of much less use for text, text is a bunch of vertical lines closely stacked together, and the vertical lines there is does not cause un-even character spacing because of the aa hinter in the same way that happens horizontally without subpixel.

[efikkan]

To me it seems really strange to have vendor specific implementations of this. Do they say if these new free sync screens also supports dp adaptive sync? I guess it's no real harm to have the vendor specific version if they support the standard as well.
/Markus

You got it mixed up. Adaptive Sync is the spec, and a part of the DP standard. Both G-Sync and FreeSync are brand names which implements of this spec, among other features. G-sync is nothing new, it has supported sync of multiple displays across SLI for years for Quadro, and to sync the displays to a specific OpenGL-application. FreeSync will probably add support for CrossFire and other similar features which are not a part of the Adaptive Sync spec. That's why FreeSync and G-Sync are different implementations of Adaptive Sync, with the largest difference being G-Sync is currently based on a draft of the spec.

All implementations of Adaptive Sync, either from Nvidia, AMD or Intel will require new driver circuits in the monitors. Since none of these were available at the time of G-Sync's "release", Nvidia created a more expensive temporary solution using an FPGA. A new generation of chips are now appearing, and AMD will soon provide competitions, so the prices will go down. Like with all new hardware, there will still be a premium, so neither solution will ever be free of charge. AMD can never decide whether FreeSync is "free of charge" or actually "free". It's obviously neither, since all solutions will cost a premium and the implementation will not be free, unlike the Adaptive Sync spec which is free. (compare this with the fact that OpenGL and OpenCL are specs, but not all implementations are.)

FreeSync is just the driver part that takes advantage of Adaptive-Sync. G-Sync could start supporting Adaptive-Sync (the VESA standard) too, and these monitors should then work automatically with G-Sync. That's why AMD's approach is superior. Of course, we all know Nvidia, they won't support the standard, and will continue with their own implementation.

Why do people keep this double standard? When Nvidia implement an open standard they are evil, but when AMD does it they are the good guys. And even with AMD's proprietary Mantle API they are still praised, while Nvidia is harassed. Hypocrisy.

[Nobu]

It would be nice, though...being able to tell your DE you want to have 3 virtual desktops, all on one screen, in such-and-such an orientation. For bonus points: make them each able to have separate wallpapers, or have one wallpaper span the whole space.

Then, it'd be as simple as dragging your window to whichever virtual desk you want, then either click maximize or drag to the top of the screen/border. Simple, and elegant. ^_^

As far as free/adaptive/g-sync goes, I'll wait until I want a bigger monitor or this one bites the dust.

[lem79]

It seems simple enough to me; Windows 7/8, Gnome 3.x, Xfce 4.10, Cinnamon, and I think also KDE Plasma a.k.a. KWin supports easy snap to edges to make the window "half-fullscreen". Snap two windows side by side, and voila! Tiling WMs as mentioned can do it too. But okay, they're only monitors, nothing big to argue about. I guess you people deserve more options so I'll drop it.

Unity/Compiz does this too. You can snap to the edges (or top and bottom) by either dragging a window into the respective edge of the screen, or use Ctrl+Alt+numbers on the keypad, which are mapped logically like this:

1: Lower left quarter
2: Lower half
3: Lower right quarter
4: Left half
5: Maximise
6: Right half
7: Upper left quarter
8: Top half
9: Upper right quarter
0: Minimise

This method is great for easily tiling a bunch of terminals on the screen, for example (combined with Ctrl-Alt-t to open the terminals to start with).

[BradN]

That is if you like subpixel font rendering of course, some people don't. I have some kind of mental dissonance, I like my terminals with fix width bitmap fonts, but i demand subpixel for web, and fixed width with subpixel for coding.

For coding, I never thought subpixel rendering was too useful, simply because of syntax coloring - when you have red or blue or green text, you can't really effectively use the subpixel part that well. It does help a little though.