Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (34883)	4/4/2001 5:48:49 PM
From: andreas_wonisch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Joe, Re: I couldn't looked at all of the components of the spreadsheet yet, since I am in middle of Flasking a DVD Imagine how fast it would be with your Athlon + DDR combo. ;) Still waiting for the Swifttech cooler? BTW, did you try out the recently released, optimized version of Flask? It should even speed up a Celeron because the initial version was extremely badly compiled (the new release also has dual CPU support). And concerning the PAL DVD: I watch NTSC DVDs (region 1 coded) regularly on my TV, since I prefer the original version (and not the German dubbed one). So I guess the other way round shouldn't bee a problem either. Since NTSC uses 60 Hz, while PAL uses only 50 Hz, it should be even easier this way. However, PAL uses more vertical lines (472 IIRC) compared to NTSC. Or are you converting to VCD NTSC standard? Andreas

To: Joe NYC who wrote (34883)	4/4/2001 5:51:00 PM
From: 5dave22	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Joe, I have a Celeron 700 that I use for burning CD's - and I thought I would also use it for Photoshop. Damn thing sucks - it freezes constantly. I have a 120 PII Fujitsu laptop that works better. I loaded Photoshop on my Athlon Classic and it runs like a champ. Unfortunately I don't have CDRW on that computer. Dave

To: Joe NYC who wrote (34883)	4/4/2001 6:23:28 PM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Dear Jozef: The real performance gains losses come from the target bit rate and the target resolution. The higher of the former and the lower of the latter translates into higher frame rates. Converting 320x240x30 into a 10Mb/s stream can be 10 times faster than converting 640x480x30 into that same stream. The same order of magnitude can be seen to compress 320x240x30 into a 10Mb/s be 10 times faster than into a 2.5Mb/s stream. The reason that to a slower rate requires much more computation and passes through many levels to get a smaller rate (or a higher relative compression ratio). Converting a quarter screen (320x240x30) to a MPEG-I VCD (1.2Mb/s) (comp ratio 75:1) took about 1 frame per second on my K6-3/400 whereas a full screen (640x480x30) to a MJPEG 24Mb/s (comp ratio 10:1) was done at 30 frames per second or in real time. So 4 frames per second is not unreasonable to a MPEG-4 VCD for a 320x240x30 resolution on a dual Celeron 366MHz using the DIVX encoder. IIRC a 1.2G Tbird does this at 18-24 fps depending on FSB/memory setup. Pete