Doom9's Forum - View Single Post

Orf · 16th December 2014, 05:32

nevcairiel, madshi, thanks
I do understand OpenCL/DirectCompute is more powerfull, that was why I initially asked.
But this NEDI/NNEDI is really confusing me. To summarize what I've learned from your:
- NNEDI3 is the most heavy algorithm, but it gives the best result in the end
- NEDI implemented here for example is less heavy, so PS use is acceptable
- madVR internally should have at least two image processing conveyers. #1 is PS conveyer, #2 is OpenCL conveyer. Also it possible have DirectCompute conveyer as #3
- IMadVRExternalPixelShaders supports only #1 (?)
- To make general and flexible image processing support all three conveyers have to be implemented
- Which one of the three is better is kind of an open question. Also picking and implementing only one of them will require rewriting of hlsl/cl code (thing I very unlikely can do myself)

I'm I still missing something ?

16th December 2014, 05:32	#71 \| Link
Orf YAP author Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Russian Federation Posts: 111	nevcairiel, madshi, thanks I do understand OpenCL/DirectCompute is more powerfull, that was why I initially asked. But this NEDI/NNEDI is really confusing me. To summarize what I've learned from your: - NNEDI3 is the most heavy algorithm, but it gives the best result in the end - NEDI implemented here for example is less heavy, so PS use is acceptable - madVR internally should have at least two image processing conveyers. #1 is PS conveyer, #2 is OpenCL conveyer. Also it possible have DirectCompute conveyer as #3 - IMadVRExternalPixelShaders supports only #1 (?) - To make general and flexible image processing support all three conveyers have to be implemented - Which one of the three is better is kind of an open question. Also picking and implementing only one of them will require rewriting of hlsl/cl code (thing I very unlikely can do myself) I'm I still missing something ?