I assumed because the category was “things that aren’t actually real chips / potato fries” - by being real pieces of fried potato these are disqualified 😅

That’s cool, nothing bad ever happens when Germany’s economy tanks…

Based on how you’re observing the loading move from 100% CPU ro 100% GPU, I would suggest that it is “working” to some extent.

I don’t have any experience with that GPU, but here’s few things to keep in mind with this:

1. When you use a GPU for video encoding, it’s not the case that it’s ‘accelerating’ what you were doing without it. What you’re doing is switching from running a software implementation of an HEVC encoder on your CPU to running a hardware implementation of an HEVC encoder on your GPU. Hardware and Software encoders are very different to one another and they won’t combine forces; it’s one or the other.

2. Video encoders have literally hundreds of configuration options. How you configure the encoder will have a massive impact on the encoding time. To get results that I’m happy with for archiving usually means encoding at slower than real-time for me on a 5800X CPU; if you’re getting over 100fps on your CPU I would guess that you have it setup on some very fast settings - I wouldn’t recommend this for anything other than real-time transcoding. Conversely, it’s possible you have slower settings configured for your GPU.

3. Video encoding is very difficult to do “well” in hardware. Generally speaking software is better suited to the sort of algorithms that are needed. GPUs can be beneficial in speeding up an encode, but the result won’t be as good in terms of quality vs file size - for the same quality a GPU encode will be bigger, or for the same file size a GPU encode will be lower quality.

I guess this is a roundabout way of suggesting that if you’re happy with the quality of your 100fps CPU encodes, stick with it!

1440p for the win!

The real question is why did they install a system based on 5.25" floppy disks in 1998 in the first place!?

The 5.25" floppy was surpassed by the 3.5" floppy by 1988 - ten years prior to this systems installation - and by 1998 most new software was being distributed on CD-ROM. So by my reckoning, in 1998 they installed a ‘new’ system based on hardware that was 1.5 generations out-of-date and haven’t updated it in the 26 years since.

At Kuala Lumpa International Airport half the signs were like this near our gate a couple weeks ago…

Just to add in case you’re not aware, the EF-RF adapters are literally just spacers that shift the lens mount to where it would have been if there was a mirror in there - optically it’s just 24mm of air, so no quality impact at all.

The only thing to keep in mind is that there is a slight autofocus slow-down with the much older lenses, but not enough to bother me.

I literally just faced this same dilemma! I went online looking to upgrade the kit lens I’ve had on my Canon EOS 70D for nine years and got sucked into the mirrorless hype.

In the end I sortof ended up upgrading both… I got a great deal on a second hand Canon mirrorless body, and because it has in-body image stabilisation I could then spend a lot less money to get a 25 year old ‘L’ series EF lens rather than a newer one with IS in the lens.

I’m extremely pleased with this set-up so far, and even more pleased that I can add to my lens collection in future for much less money than if I needed IS hardware in every lens.

I’ve found all of the tabs on Google have a tendency to go AWOL these days - like the other day I was searching for camera lenses and Google took away the ‘Products’ (formerly kmown as ‘Shopping’) tab, even though what I was searching for couldn’t have been more obviously a product. Instead, all I could get were super low quality copy-paste blogs vaguely related to the product.