Pemalite said:
Peh said:
1. You miss one important point. Freesync relies on the integrated display controller inside the GPU. It's still partly hardware based. Thus, the GPU being from Nvidia, it misses the essential hardware for using Freesync. It is simply not purely based on software. If this would be the case, AMD would just update all the older GPU's.
Freesync = Hardware / Software
G-Sync = Hardware / Hardware
Yes, the Tegra X1 is not connected to the display via hdmi or any other display. But according to what I just wrote, it's not worth mentioning it anymore. So an adaptive refreshrate inside the Switch will not be possible.
|
1. You are missing the point of an open standard and nintendo employing nVidia to customize the SoC.
It was entirely possible before the consoles release. Heck it's still possible with a refresh of the hardware, nothing you have stated changes that fact.
Peh said:
Dock implementation.. I don't know, because just a HDMI 2.1 or DP 1.2a or newer interface will still need the hardware necessary for FreeSync. So, delevoping a controller which takes over this task from the GPU. I don't think Nvidia will comply. But this entire argument is pure speculation.
|
2. The Dock can have a seperate/updated chip to handle all that you know.
Peh said:
2. Again, 1994-1996 how many people owned a CRT TV which did a higher resolution then PAL, NTSC and SECAM? How widespread were those. Did Nintendo took those CRT TV's into account? |
3. They don't have to resolve a higher resolution than the 4:3 PAL, NTSC or SECAM standards to exceed the Nintendo 64's capabilities. The Nintendo 64 wasn't meeting those standards for the majority of of it's games.
Peh said:
3. Not denying my statement. |
4. Nor confirming it.
Go look up Australian slang and what it means.
|
1. Why should Nvidia allow a different solution besides their own? You still havn't answered this question. Nintendo has a contract with Nvidia, you know? You have to look at it from a different perspective. Nvidia came up first with the technology for their GPU and still wants to promote it.
For example: Nvidia ditches G-Sync and goes for an open adaptive refresh rate alternative. This would be seen as Nvidia has no confidence in their own solution.
But why stop there. Get a Nvidia graphics card, develop a converter which uses the adaptive refresh rate standard and hook it up to any display that supports it. Again, do you think that Nvidia will let you do it? Remember when people used Nvidia GPU for PhysX rendering and AMD for visual rendering at the same time? The moment Nvidia heard about it, they developed a driver to stop it. And I believe, if Nintendo would developed something on their own for adaptive refreshrate, Nvidia would bitch about it. They just don't like to be fucked. It's not as easy as you make it out to be.
2. Not denying this. But also not I was arguing for.
3. Why do you make it so difficult for me. The N64 wasn't made for higher res, because it itself doesn't exceeds the resolution of a standard CRT TV. The image it rendered looked ok on those TV's. On modern TV's it looks like crap. On any higher res TV during that time, it still looked like crap due to higher upscaling. So standard CRT TV's offered the best picture available during the time. It achieved what the image quality that it should do. A higher resolution (higher than the most common standard) on the N64 would increase the costs even more if they intended to go for way higher resolutions during that time.
4. What?
You can still post your reply, I will read it, but probably, won't bother replying anymore. Got way more important stuff to do.. like playing MK 8 D on my switch :3
