• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

*** AMD "Zen" thread (inc AM4/APU discussion) ***

AllBodies said:
Incorrect.

Watching a video (in general) at a higher resolution than your monitor, for better bitrate, will result in better picture quality. Particularly if it's not RAW video, which is 99% of the time.

In the exact example for YouTube, there are 2 very straightforward things going on.

If we go back to this:



Firstly you can see with simple maths that the higher resolutions actually have higher bitrate per pixel per frame. So 1 pixel of 4K60 has more information than 1 pixel of 1080p60.

This is because 4K60 is 4x the pixels of 1080p60, but the bitrate is up to 5.7x higher.

The second thing that's quite important is the YCbCr compression used in h264/VP9 (or 4:2:2).

Basically when you downsample 4k60 4:2:2 content, you can use the extra information to output 1080p60 4:4:4 video (also with higher information per pixel, in YouTube's case).
Click to expand...

All of which is definitely incorrect as you are starting with h.264/265 compressed footage to upload, unless you do something stupid like try to upload uncompressed 4:4:4 RGB / Composite straight to the cloud. Raw codecs like stuff from RED or similar are a capture/edit format. Youtube is like an mp3 (in fact an mp4). Yes you can use down sampled 4:4:2 4K to 4:4:4 1080p at capture/edit stage but not on playback via h264/265/webmovie/flash.
 
Last edited:
Looks like one of the first Engineering Samples for an APU has shown up at SiSoftware's database.

http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_s...ead7e6c0a895a086fec3f2d4b1d4e9d9ff8cb189&l=de

Looks to be clocked at 3Ghz at the moment, with an 11CU 800Mhz GPU.

24e321e2b5a44060b66191710d5390b2.png
 
FloatingPoint said:
All of which is definitely incorrect as you are starting with h.264/265 compressed footage to upload, unless you do something stupid like try to upload uncompressed 4:4:4 RGB / Composite straight to the cloud. Raw codecs like stuff from RED or similar are a capture/edit format. Youtube is like an mp3 (in fact an mp4). Yes you can use down sampled 4:4:2 4K to 4:4:4 1080p at capture/edit stage but not on playback via h264/265/webmovie/flash.
Click to expand...

Have a look at this: https://youtu.be/kIf9h2Gkm_U

Also I made a mistake, it's 4:2:0 widely used, not 4:2:2.
 
It will be interesting to see just how much progress AMD has made on the APU front, Kaveri (and the other ones I can't remember...) gave a lot of people good basic gaming performance at an awesome price point. This will deliver twice the cores and hopefully the same 52% IPC increase. That should make it 3 times more capable from a CPU perspective which negates one of the hardest to swallow aspects of the previous AMD APU's.

Of course what we don't know at the moment is how Polaris cores rank against Vega. But there are 14 Polaris CU's in an RX560 - So hopefully 11 Vega CU's puts graphics performance north of that.

It makes a chip that will ace all productivity tasks for mainstream use - it would make a very attractive OEM platform with strong 1080p gaming credentials.

Ryzen may be the enthusiast chip we were all hoping to see making AMD a really strong argument at the top of the tree but from a long term health of AMD perspective I can see this APU being massive.
 
Beren said:
It will be interesting to see just how much progress AMD has made on the APU front, Kaveri (and the other ones I can't remember...) gave a lot of people good basic gaming performance at an awesome price point. This will deliver twice the cores and hopefully the same 52% IPC increase. That should make it 3 times more capable from a CPU perspective which negates one of the hardest to swallow aspects of the previous AMD APU's.

Of course what we don't know at the moment is how Polaris cores rank against Vega. But there are 14 Polaris CU's in an RX560 - So hopefully 11 Vega CU's puts graphics performance north of that.

It makes a chip that will ace all productivity tasks for mainstream use - it would make a very attractive OEM platform with strong 1080p gaming credentials.

Ryzen may be the enthusiast chip we were all hoping to see making AMD a really strong argument at the top of the tree but from a long term health of AMD perspective I can see this APU being massive.
Click to expand...
it would be a very great marketing move if Vega cores already exist in zen CPU's and AMD do a 'one more thing' boom y'all have vega already, here's the new firmware.
 
FloatingPoint said:
it would be a very great marketing move if Vega cores already exist in zen CPU's and AMD do a 'one more thing' boom y'all have vega already, here's the new firmware.
Click to expand...
This APU is scheduled for Q4 I think? Hopefully it will mean that there is a new breed of budget gaming options on the market for Christmas this year. With the increased price of an Xbox Scorpio a budget gaming box built around one of these could be very very attractive for Christmas.

-Edit- I was wondering if we could extrapolate Vega CU performance based on these results to see where it was going to sit against Nvidia, However this will have a completely different interposer design among many other differences so I doubt it would work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom