Sorgelig wrote:Unlike analog signal, data in HDMI is synced by clock. Very cheap chinese displays happily accept any pixel clock and even fully sync to non standard refresh rates. The only problem with cheap monitors is rubbish quality of panel. Otherwise they would be a perfect monitors for MiSTer.
I don't see why expensive gaming monitors should not accept any pixel clock as cheap chinese monitors. It's should be their nature.
I agree that it would be good if they would accept non standard pixel clocks, but fact is that not all do. And those that do accept an arbitrary pixel clock, don't support this officially. Regardless, that is not Freesync.
The advantage of Freesync, besides being a formal standard, is that it probably makes easier to solve the problem of matching the input and output refresh rates. Because Freesync is a variable refresh rate, you can compensate changing the number of cycles on each frame, knowing that the monitor (as long as it support Freesync) will accept that gracefully.
Hopefully Freesync would eventually become an universal standard supported by all monitors.
mahen wrote:Dunno if it helps but Freesync support was recently added to Linux & open source (AMD/Intel) drivers / MESA...
Not sure that would help too much. PC drivers don't talk directly to the monitor as we do. A PC driver interacts with the GPU and the graphic card and then it doesn't need all the low level details about Freesync.
Yep ; but I wonder if it enables to use a single buffer and keep a tear-free display ?
I think it should be possible. But at Sorgelig pointed out, MiSTer can already do that, at least on most cases, without Freesync.