this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2024
2 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59651 readers
2690 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Intel's stock dropped around 30% overnight, shaving some $39 billion from the company's market capitalization since rumors of a pending layoff first emerged. The devastating results come after the chip giant reported a loss for the second quarter, complained about yield issues with the Meteor Lake CPU, provided a modest business outlook for the next few quarters, and announced plans to lay off 15,000 people worldwide.

When the NYSE closed on July 31, Intel's market capitalization was $130.86 billion. Then, a report about Intel's massive layoffs was published, and the company's market capitalization dropped sharply to $123.96 billion on August 1. Following Intel's financial report yesterday, the company's capitalization dropped to $91.86 billion. Essentially, Intel has lost half of its capitalization since January. As of now, Intel's market value is a fraction of Nvidia's worth and less than half of AMD's.

As Intel's actions look rather desperate, analysts believe that Intel's challenges are existential. "Intel's issues are now approaching the existential," Stacy Rasgon, an analyst with Bernstein, told Reuters.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Politely, not the worst compared to what, exactly?

It's way worse than qsv, nvenc, x264 or x265 which are basically the only hardware or cpu options you're likely to run into doing plex transcoding.

[–] ag10n@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

QSV is a very good product, high-quality and efficient. It’s also very mature, lots of signage in large deployments. I’ve tried AMD’s AMF streaming and at lower bit-rates you get a lot more blocking. It’s fine but QSV has an edge.

https://www.pcworld.com/article/827992/tested-intel-arc-av1-video-encoder-vs-nvidia-amd.html

Lower quality at any given bitrate was my experience too. For local stuff it didn't really matter: if I could do 3x the bitrate to get the same quality, then meh, who cares.

If you're streaming/doing shit over the internet/encoding for something like Youtube, though, it's uh, not a good tradeoff because you can't necessarily even make that tradeoff.

[–] sanpo@sopuli.xyz 0 points 3 months ago

I don't have QSV or NVENC hardware to compare, but AMD is perfectly fine in most cases.
I mostly noticed quality drop with very busy scenes and some scene transitions.
Outside of those the quality was acceptable.

I'd say on my setup it's comparable to software encoding with x264 veryfast preset.

And my GPU is 5 years old now, so I'm sure newer cards have improved.