FreeSync Support For RADV Vulkan Driver Blocked By Lack Of Config System

[mikelpr]

is it not possible to spike the refresh rate when you move the mouse or something is updating faster? e.g. let's say I'm looking at clementine, not moving the mouse not doing anything nothing but clementine's bar analyzer at 30fps is updating the display. can't the compositor set freesync refresh rate to whatever clementine is refreshing at, and when something else updates change to the set refresh rate (taking it as the maximum)? is it impossible or is it just not implemented?

[smitty3268]

Why doesn't someone just adjust the patch to default to off?

Then add a check to enable it if the DXVK engine is detected (radv already does that elsewhere in the driver) or enable it if a new environment variable is set.

Problem solved for the short-term, and Bas can figure out what kind of config system he wants over the long term.

[darkbasic]

FreeSync and Gsync still add input latency, just slightly less than regular Vsync.

You clearly never benchmarked any of those. Have a look at this: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCP7...vmm0-stL-pNFrw
It's important to limit the max fps just under the max refresh rate and if you do so you won't have any tearing while also not introducing any noticeable latency.
There are comparisons with Vsync, the difference is HUGE.
Freesync is the best thing happened to gaming in a long time, I suggest you to try it.

[humbug]

Really when I want that Linux is easy to use for everyone. The AMD windows vulkan driver does not support freesync so this is a unique feature that is blocked by badly designed IBM software.

Yes it does.

[gamerk2]

You clearly never benchmarked any of those. Have a look at this: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCP7...vmm0-stL-pNFrw
It's important to limit the max fps just under the max refresh rate and if you do so you won't have any tearing while also not introducing any noticeable latency.
There are comparisons with Vsync, the difference is HUGE.
Freesync is the best thing happened to gaming in a long time, I suggest you to try it.

Freesync is a worst implementation of what Gsync already did. Case in point: When HDMI implemented their VRR spec into HDMI 2.1 (which will likely obsolete both Freesync and Gsync), they basically copied what Gsync does.

[skeevy420]

is it not possible to spike the refresh rate when you move the mouse or something is updating faster? e.g. let's say I'm looking at clementine, not moving the mouse not doing anything nothing but clementine's bar analyzer at 30fps is updating the display. can't the compositor set freesync refresh rate to whatever clementine is refreshing at, and when something else updates change to the set refresh rate (taking it as the maximum)? is it impossible or is it just not implemented?

First you'd need a FreeSync monitor that supports that low of a frame rate. A lot of the LG Ultrawides, for an example, run between 40-75fps for FreeSync. If you're GPU can't push 40+fps then FS is useless with one of those monitors. Clementine wouln't even be able to trigger FreeSync in that instance. It probably isn't hard to guess what kind of monitor I want.

But, pretending FreeSync supports down to 0 fps, the problem we'll have is the Clementine bar is wanting to display 30fps constantly, the desktop is variable between 0 and monitor's max frame rate, you just opened Game of Thrones Season 6 Episode 8 in SMPlayer that runs at 24fps, and you have a YouTube tab in Firefox with a 48fps benchmark video. Which framerate does FreeSync pick to use? It probably isn't hard to guess what I'm watching either.

One program in full screen doesn't have the conflict of interest that a multi-window desktop will have.

[gamerk2]

HDMI is an expensive consumer product protocol. The DP protocol is almost free to implement and designed for computers. No wonder that motherboards with the HDMI connector costs about 20 usd more and the amdgpu driver supports DP monitors bests.

Too bad DP is DOA in the HDTV market, and given manufactures want to use the same processes whenever possible is a major strike against DP. There's also a cost to include both physical connectors; there's no reason to support multiple competing standards that do essentially the same exact thing. And given HDMI is more ubiquitous and covers more use cases (as of 2.1), there's no reason for DPs continued existence.

Nevermind those of us who've moved to TVs as our main displays due to a lack of OLED panels, much less anything larger then 32". Why bother purchasing a 27" LCD monitor for well over a thousand dollars when I can get a 55" OLED with the same exact feature set at the same price?

[ssokolow]

Too bad DP is DOA in the HDTV market, and given manufactures want to use the same processes whenever possible is a major strike against DP. There's also a cost to include both physical connectors; there's no reason to support multiple competing standards that do essentially the same exact thing. And given HDMI is more ubiquitous and covers more use cases (as of 2.1), there's no reason for DPs continued existence.

Unless I missed a fundamental change in recent revisions, HDMI is still a timing-based protocol that's been bodged to support FreeSync, while DisplayPort is a packet-based protocol. That's why you can drive multiple monitors off a DisplayPort connector as long as you stay within the bandwidth limits.

The only reason you can buy passive adapters is that it's possible to wire a passive adapter such that "DisplayPort++" connectors will switch into a mode where, electrically, they're just funny-looking HDMI/Single-Link DVI connectors and supporting DisplayPort++ is so common that most manufacturers don't bother to provide any indication that they do. (eg. I don't remember my EVGA GeForce GTX750 mentioning it anywhere but a passive adapter does work.)

Nevermind those of us who've moved to TVs as our main displays due to a lack of OLED panels, much less anything larger then 32". Why bother purchasing a 27" LCD monitor for well over a thousand dollars when I can get a 55" OLED with the same exact feature set at the same price?

I actually go the other way around. It's getting harder and harder to find TVs without that "smart TV" garbage, so you might as well buy an HDMI-capable LCD monitor for your game console and get your DRMed media fix with something more upgradable, removable, and hopefully less exploitable, like an Amazon Fire TV stick or Google Chromecast stick instead.

[ssokolow]

A 55 Inch 4K TV is too big for a desktop use, 2.35m is the recommended watching distance.

To be fair, when I have the budget (as opposed to using thrifted or gifted monitors), I want to track down a 55-inch 4K large-format monitor with a suitably wide viewing angle to replace my current 4480x1080 spread of three monitors because it'll have the same non-Hi DPI but double my desktop space as if I'd added another row of monitors above/below this one.

(I currently have a 19" 1280x1024 monitor, a 22" 1920x1080 monitor, and another 19" 1280x1024 monitor side-by-side and, if I go 4K, I don't want to waste electricity and dump waste heat into my room driving many more pixels for the same number of open applications.)

It'll also have the benefit that, when I push my chair aside, I'll be able to fullscreen movies or games and enjoy them from my bed at the recommended viewing distance.

[skeevy420]

A 55 Inch 4K TV is too big for a desktop use, 2.35m is the recommended watching distance.

I've used 50" 1080p TVs as my monitors for over 15 years. Once you use monitors like that for a long time, anything under 32" becomes too small for desktop use.