THANK YOU BASED NVIDIA
>>54766153
Oh look, the shills are arriving. Fuck off.
Didn't AMD do this like half a year ago?
>>54766189
AMD does not support HEVC Main12 hardware decoding or Main10 hardware encoding or DisplayPort 1.4
Also AMD has nothing but paper launching shit for the last 6 months while Nvidia is first to FINFET
>>54766171
Nobody is going to put effort into shilling a product on board with less than 200 users. You are not a special snowflake, just face it.
Majority of /g/ is using Nvidia anyway so all this bullshit around jews, shills and redirecting to >>>/v/ is getting stale.
>>54766212
If you think there are no shills on /g/ you're either deluded or too new, sage
>>54766153
>AMD announces a bunch of technology that they want to push
>even says they're going for smaller die mainstream cards, so they'll probably beat Nvidia to market
>Nope, Nvidia beats their mid-range cards to market with their own flagships AND beats their new technologies to market too
AMD is utterly fucked. What an incompetent, bumbling mess of a company.
>>54766153
>bragging about HDR
>when monitors with HDR don't even exist yet
>>54766153
How do you pull off "HDR" on an LCD monitor? Are they using FALD (full array local dimming) like those televisions?
That's going to be expensive as fuck, might as well just skip HDR altogether and buy that $5,000 Dell OLED monitor.
>>54766254
HDR monitors of course
You have to buy new DisplayPort 1.4 HDR monitor
>>54766223
Fanboys? Sure. Shills? I doubt it. 4chan is not so frequented website to be worth of that effort.
>>54766264
Great answer.
>>54766212
>less than 200 users
No way we're this small.
What's important here?
>>54766293
Biggest threads frequently have below 200 unique posters. So we either have tons of lurkers or /g/ is turning into ghost town
>>54766212
>Majority of /g/ is using Nvidia anyway
>Nobody is going to put effort into shilling a product on board with less than 200 users
this man speaks for /g/ everyone !!!
>>54766394
Just look at speccy threads. So much hated 970s everywhere.
Any tips on where I could try out this HDR feature. One can hardly imagine it from presentation.
>>54766394
>less than 200 users
Oh boy are you in for a surprise.
>>54766429
You do know that only crossboarding /v/ermin even open those threads, much less post in them?
>>54766565
So called /v/ermin board is flooded mostly by console owners. Speccy threads are /g/ users in action.
>>54766633
>/g/ users in action
You mean /v/.
>>54766212
>>>/v/
you belong there you fucking shill
What the fuck is this new "HDR" display crap? What does it actually mean in practice? Are there some performance specifications for monitor to meet before earning that spec? Is it just that a monitor is a "true" 10bit/12bit panel regardless of how the monitor is actually capable of displaying this image?
>>54768625
High Dynamic Range, common term in photography.
Basically not crunching blacks or blowing whites in a scene with either.
>>54768815
shut the fuck up idiot
>>54768842
Kill yourself nigger
>>54768625
Photography fag here
Dynamic range refers to how many exposure stops an image covers, ie how far pure black and pure white are from each other
Slide films like kodachrome have around 5-6 stops, negatives a bit higher at 5-10, and really good films developed/printed right could hit 15 or so.
Dslrs are usually around 6-10 depending on how you push it with high end dslrs up to 15 if pushed right.
Displays, like CRTs were pretty shit at 5-6ish, modern high end lcds are in the 7ish range.
The human eye has estimates all over the place, but 20-30 stops is common.
Why this matters now is with QD LCDs we now have displays that can comfortably push 15+ stops.
>>54768815
>>54768967
Yes I get what HDR actually is in photography(it's one of my hobbies), what it means in graphics engines and I can obviously deduct what the term literally means. I'm just wondering how stupid the new "HDR display" marketing talk stuff is. I have a feeling it's just something simple like a display can handle 10 and 12 bit color depths but the actual performance of the display is lackluster because of various of other reasons. Kind of like "HD Ready" which only touches the type of signal the display can handle but has no bearing at all on the image displayed.
>>54766153
>HEVC encoder
How fast is it? Is it feasible for streaming?
