Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Intel's new Core-i7, big impacts on performance

With NVidia based chipsets on Macbooks, I wouldn't be betting on Apple getting first dibs on the new Core-i7 Xeon chips. They haven't implemented the desktop ones at all. (Probably because that would make the iMac faster than the MacPro)

Anyhow the possibilities are exciting. I would imagine that HP will have an XW8800 or something like that coming.
 
I would not be angry if someone would build a machine with more that two sockets too. I hope they will keep the expandability of the xw8600. The xw8400 was a real pitty in terms of expansion slots, not to talk about Mac Pros... (they expandibility is in no way "Pro" compared to HP PCs...).

Anyhow,

bright future!

Axel
 
The regular Xeon series (5000s) only support 2 sockets, as do XP and Vista. The 7000 series of Xeons support 4 sockets, but you need Windows Server 2K3/2K8 or a non MS OS. But within a year, I hope to see dual die 8Core i7 based chips, giving 32 threads with dual sockets and hyperthreading.
 
Luki said:
I can see the line clear as day, and both sides are crappy.
Click to expand...

Hi Luki,

BTW, I do understand those images were not the best test images . . . it was simply what was available here online for me to play with.

I am curious though . . . and this is not flame-bating, but where exactly is the line?

If you want, you can post here on this thread because I think the image has been up long enough that it's not going to be a spoiler anymore (plus if someone is simply reading the thread sequentially, the test-image is a couple pages back so it's no big deal). Otherwise please feel free to PM me. Again, I am actually curious to know if the distinction is that clear.

Thanks,

Jason
 
Axel Mertes said:
Jason,

interesting comparison. Hard to say where the boarder is. I do think it could be little left from the center. I think I can see kind of a vertical "boarder" artefact in the rubber, lower left from the wheel maker name. But I can be wrong :)

Axel
Click to expand...

Nope, that is not the split point between the CineForm and the original R3D file . . . that vertical patten at the edge of the manufacturer's name was in the original R3D file as well as the CineForm file.

The CineForm/R3D split is somewhere else ;) . . . but definitely a great guess :)

Thanks,

Jason
 
that fine line through the last letter of the tire is not the split.....

I thought it was but compared them both in photoshop...the line is in both source and cineform...

i couldn't actually tell...

in photoshop...the only differences i saw was noise in the shadows...and more of it in the origional...

once again....not the best test image and jpeg artifacting a factor...so don't read anything into it..
 
I don't know where the split point is either, I was wrong like it seems everyone else was.

If someone can provide me a sharp build 16 or 17 short R3D clip (that is not posted publicly,) I put together a sequence of DPX files for comparing the different demosaic options for poll / more objective test. We don't have a Red camera at the office very often, otherwise we would have done something like the Viper uncompressed vs HDCAM-SR vs CineForm 444 in the Green Screen Challenge I did on my blog almost two years ago. Hoping to do do something similar to objectivity demonstrate why RAW compression is cool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top