Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari
How is using --fpel-cmp satd on ESA a "best practice"? Its even slower than regular ESA, and so only useful for those who have even more time to waste.
Also note that if TES/whatever its called uses SATD, the --fpel-cmp satd option will be removed.
|
Using the
chart as an approximation
roughly:
SAD - UMH - ME32
has the same quality as
SAD - ESA - ME7
and
SATD - ESA - ME4
However the FPS is 47 vs. 42 vs. 39 respectively. SATD is slowest, by not by too much. Even though SATD is 7-8% slower, the magic is that SATD, with computation (me-range increments), SATD gains quality much quicker and peaks much higher. Additionally, SATD ESA-me6 beats the quality of SAD ESA-me12 at the same FPS! Therefore, SAD ESA only has a place for me range less than 12.
So instead of telling people that ESA is only has benefits from me-7 through me-12, over other ME-types, you could tell them ESA picks up quality-wise where UMH stops. It seems a little more clean to me. I just hope the explanation is understandable.
Maybe I'm a little my willing to throw computation at it than others, but I think the average person ESA would usually do this anyway.