RT vs Software...

[Brian Ellis]

Re: RT vs software

Originally posted by Brambus

I think the plain thruth is that -NOW- playing Realtime (and going to tape) needs dedicated hardware, unless your favorite transition is a cross-dissolve (which, IMHO, it's a really good transition after all ).
My two cents
Brambus

Sorry, cannot agree. I can even do 3-D transitions (although I rarely do), stacked with other effects, in RT. I fear you're behind the times

I agree the simple X-fade is the transition I use the most!

[Brian Ellis]

Originally posted by Ray Austin
what's the hurry to 64bit???

• because it's faster
• because it's cool
• because we want it
• because it's new
• because it won't be obsolete in 2months
• because now we can

It's the only reason 64bit makes sense right now is that it is backwards compatible with all 32bit applications, with out that little feature it would hardly be as sexy as it currently is.

Is it for everybody.... yes, eventually one day 64bit will be your only choice... drag your feet all you want right now... you have time... but she's coming round the mountain!

I think "because it's new" is the world's worst reason. It is precisely because of this that I won't rush into it. I'll let the intrepid, like yourself, waste their tima and money, sorting all the problems out before I'd even consider it. I don't believe in creating sticks for my own back.

As for "because it won't be obsolete in 2 months", I agree, but in 12 months? As you know, the AMD situation is not rosy and, if there are severe problems, even in the OS, they could well go to the wall.

Although they have a 64-bit "Pentium-equivalent" design ready, have you thought why Intel are holding back on it? They forecast ~2010 for launching commercially, even though they could do it tomorrow -- well, in a few months. What do they know that you don't?

[Ray Austin]

Well Amd64 was supposed to debut months ago, so I think we can be pretty sure the problems should be minimal. Do I personally plan to jump head first... no. But Athalon 64 will be my next system. I will build it myself.

As far as what intel knows that amd doesn't??? are you kidding? The reason they won't go to 64 is more about making more money. This would be even worse without the pressence of Amd... I hate to even think about it. They force upgrades all the time... and not just a simple processor upgrade.

Intel has 64 bit already it's called Itanium. How much does one of those cost? I'll tell ya the materials used to make it aren't any more expensive than the P4. If they released a desktop 64 processor, people would find a way to get it in a server and kill Intels darling.

The whole reason intel won't go to 64bit is money... they want to bilk us for all they can. This is important for AMD, I am prepared to back them so you can thank me when INTEL is forced to reduce their prices, because without competition it's bad for everybody.

buying something new isn't a bad reason. Would you ever buy something because it's old? I know I hate it when I get a 20minute old burger... how bout you?

[dshumake]

Interesting read:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11668

dshumake

[Brian Ellis]

Itanium is not a workstation CPU, never was and never will be. It is designed purely for server applications and is optimised for them. At the moment, the only OS for it, that I know of, is Linux. You cannot compare it with Athlon64.

I may not like a 20 min burger, but I like real meat, not third-grade hashed up fatty rubbish. This year, I've been forced, by circumstances (grandchildren), to partake of a single Big Mac -- and I did not enjoy it. However, where MS is concerned, I NEVER buy the latest until at least 2 or, pref, 3 SPs have been issued. Much safer!!! I'm on W2k SP2 at the moment.

[Ray Austin]

Originally posted by Brian Ellis
Itanium is not a workstation CPU, never was and never will be. It is designed purely for server applications and is optimised for them. At the moment, the only OS for it, that I know of, is Linux. You cannot compare it with Athlon64.

yes, true... but Itanium is 64bit only. So why 64bit only for the server market??? Because Intel can charge a premium for those chips.

You're right about comparing it to athalon... can't be done because athalon64 can do 32bit code and will be faster. Pretty hard to compare a snail to a rabbit. hehehe

just to let you know Sp4 was released not long ago for w2k, has some important security fixes.

If A64 takes off how long will it take intel to react???

[Fluff]

Intel can't really be caught off guard!

[Brambus]

RT vs. 64 bits vs. ....foliage...

Well...
while Intel and Amd are so hard struggling for my money,
I think i'll spend it goin' two week in Vermont and Maine to see the foliage season...
My old and sluggish 32 bit Intel powered Premiere (aarrrrghhh...) needs something to eat for the times to come.
I don't like to see all those bits going back and forth in vain...
Leaving tomorrow! Rangeley waits...
Cheers

Brambus

[Ray Austin]

Re: RT vs. 64 bits vs. ....foliage...

Originally posted by Brambus
Well...
while Intel and Amd are so hard struggling for my money,

Cheers

Brambus

Well it's Amd who is struggling for your dollar. Intel has a nice little cash stash and although it's no where near as big as daddy Gates it still a sizeable sum near $7bil or so.

Intel is very smart, don't think for one minute they aren't ready for 64bit. They would rather hold it back so they can make even more money.

The fact of the matter is Intel has a profitable quarter one right after the other while Amd is losing money. It is inevitable that Amd needs a big win, but Amd has been in this position for a long time... Intel would probably sink much faster if they were in the same position.

A couple of more days should say alot.... can't wait!

[bubu]

HUH? I thought this thread was about software encoding vs hardware's (RT... if RT is considered as a real and thorough hardware encoding)

I read somewhere in magazine the interview with engineers of Canopus, who says pretty good software (and PC hardware that supports it) makes better encoding than any simple hardware encoder chip. Coming out from those who makes hardware encoder products, I would trust that.