I saw that, and I'm curious if that's a death-knell for LPCAMM ram. My understanding was that the entire point of that new standard was to allow for the higher ram speeds and lower latencies etc that you would normally get with soldered ram, but in a modular, swappable package.
If LPCAMM already can't keep up with requirements when it is barely even out, then my guess is it won't fare well going forward.
So 1 of 2 things is probably true:
AMD is not being completely truthful with their statements that LPCAMM wasn't able to work (maybe it was just more difficult/complicated than they were willing to do, but it could work or
latency/speed requirements have already outpaced what LPCAMM can provide and soldered ram is the future.
I really hope it's the former, but it wouldn't be the first time something like the second has occurred. Apparently cache also used to be a separate, swappable component before it became integrated into the die. RAM might end up going the same way.
The non-MAX Ryzen laptops also announced today actually use socketed RAM.
I guess they'd claim it is only the MAX AMD procs which force soldered RAM, but since they could as well have used a non-MAX chip (and correspondingly reduce the price) this just shows how much of this is an arbitrary, and therefore questionable, decision from Framework rather than any restriction AMD sets.
Yes, those are the ones with a 128 bit memory bus that can reuse designs from previous generations. Nearly every laptop and desktop has has 128 bit memory for the last few decades, the strix halo is the first with 256 bit wide x86 targeted at tablets, laptops, and SFFs. Much like the m1/m2/m4 pro. The M3 pro for some reason decided on 192 bits wide.
In general, people have the wrong idea about how fuses work. They're not supposed to blow at their rated current, they're supposed to withstand it indefinitely, and only blow at much higher currents. Look up any datasheet from a well established manufacturer and see for yourself (like this one from littelfuse: https://littelfuse.com/products/fuses/cartridge-fuses/5x20mm... )
Indeed. There is a slight temperature dependent de-rating, but in general that is correct. To add, Littelfuse is in fact the inventor of the standard automotive blade fuses - they know their fuses if anyone does. I archived a datasheet of some of their blade fuses here [0] - you can see that a 1-amp fuse will run at 1A indefinitely, 2A for 300ms, 3A ~100ms, 4A ~60ms, 5A ~40ms etc. The same datasheet will tell you the temperature derating for their blade fuses is less than 25% at any temperatures you want your electronics to live at.
Another fun fact that is obvious from applying Ohm's Law - you can calculate the current flowing through a fuse by measuring the voltage drop. You can do the math yourself, or there are handy "fuse voltage drop charts" so you don't even have to use a calculator. Yes, this means that with a simple oscilloscope you now have a portable energy meter that requires zero rewiring. Ha, I accidentally brought us full circle :)
Just be careful with that, measuring mains is a bad idea with most oscilloscopes. The ground pin is usually connected to mains earth, so if you're not careful, you might create a short and blow up your scope. If you have one of these battery powered ones, it'll be fine, but the mains powedered ones are usually a no-no.
Ah, I was referring to automotive blade fuses (which have lovely little contacts on top for measuring.) They are only rated to 32VDC so if you are running mains through that you have other issues. Indeed I'd just use my battery-powered oscilloscope to measure mains but if I wanted to use a benchtop scope I'd use an isolation transformer.
People also have a wrong idea about how buying electronic components on Amazon/Aliexpress/eBay/etc. works. You buy a few of the same, test them, then use them if they work. Otherwise ask for refund.
Otherwise you're up for a big surprise that all your TL081's are LM356 instead, or that mosfet you bought has 3x the Rds(on) than expected, or that your fuse doesn't work.
There's already software that does this: https://github.com/master-of-zen/Av1an
Encoding this way should indeed improve quality slightly. Whether that is actually noticeable/measurable... I'm not sure.
I've messed around with av1an. Keep in mind the software used for scene chunking, L-SMASH, is only documented in Japanese [1], but it does the trick pretty well as long as you're not messing with huge dimensions like HD VR where you have video dimensions that do stuff like crash quicktime on a mac
ffmpeg and x265 allow you to do this too. frame-threads=1 will use 1 thread per frame addressing the issue OP mentioned, without big perf penalty, in contrary to
'pools' switch which sets the threads to be used for encoding.
Making good 'visual storytelling' films requires some real talent, a deep understanding of the strengths of the film as a medium, and a lot of resources. In comparison, a 'talking heads' movie can be made with a few actors sitting in a single room without much regard for cinematography (hell, event a single actor sitting in a car may suffice, like in "Locke"). That's why there has been so few great 'visual storytellers' like Keaton and Chaplin.
">It may shock many VR game players that want 120+ degree FOVs, but SMTPE, which sets the recommendations for movie theaters, says the optimal viewing angle for HDTV is only 30°"
The reason VR enthusiasts want wide FOVs is not because they want to watch movies stretched to 120°. Nobody does that. They want wide FOVs because even at relatively high FOV, like the 106 of Quest Pro, the edges of the display are still easily visible and the image does not fill eye's FOV fully. Yes, the resolution of what we can see towards the edges of our vision are much lower than what we can see in the center, but it's about getting rid of the visible boundry that messes with immersion.
And it's also ok if the pixels-per-degree (PPD) towards the edges is lower.
Which makes PPD analysis based on counting pixels suspect. Good optics can cheat by moving pixels from the peripheral field of view to the central field of view.
Simulavr claims to go from 24.48 PPD (pixels / field of view) to 35.5 PPD (actual pixels per degree near the centre) by doing this.
Nowadays most basic LED bulbs just put the LEDs in series to get the combined voltage drop close to the rectified and filtered mains voltage, and a linear regulator takes care of the rest. This is cheaper and simpler than other methods mentioned by other users (switching or capacitive dropper). Here's a nice video with a schematic and even a way to hack them to lower the power: https://youtu.be/5HTa2jVi_rc (feel free to skip around, no need to watch the whole video to understand it)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure film has a higher dynamic range than digital SDR video? From a quick google search, 13 stops for film vs 6 stops for SDR. Obviously the stock that was used for final delivery to theaters was much worse than the stock that movies were shot on, but still.
