Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Hardware & Software > Software players

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 4th March 2015, 19:12   #321  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,661
Level 5.1 is the old max of H.264, now it's 5.2.

For HEVC maximum level is 6.2 and should be supported by GTX 960
__________________
Win 10 x64 (18362.388) - Core i3-9100F - nVidia 1660 (436.15)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2015, 19:56   #322  |  Link
iSunrise
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikosD View Post
Level 5.1 is the old max of H.264, now it's 5.2.

For HEVC maximum level is 6.2 and should be supported by GTX 960
Yes, but is it actually the case? Especially Level 6.2 seems way too high. I would expect Level 5.2 at the most.

Can someone with a GTX 960 verify?
iSunrise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2015, 20:07   #323  |  Link
sneaker_ger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,478
Just look at the benchmarks that have been posted: GTX960 does not fully support 6.2.
sneaker_ger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2015, 20:32   #324  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,661
I think it supports 4K L6.2, what benchmark do you mean ?

Is there any clip not playable ?
__________________
Win 10 x64 (18362.388) - Core i3-9100F - nVidia 1660 (436.15)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2015, 20:36   #325  |  Link
sneaker_ger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,478
Level 6.2 allows 4K @ 300 fps, 8K @ 120 fps.
sneaker_ger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2015, 20:46   #326  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 9,793
5.2 may barely work depending on the complexity, but its only constrained by speed there, not any other features.
6 and up support higher resolutions (8K), which are not supported, so those levels are not supported.

A level is only supported if its fully supported, including speed and resolution constraints. 5.1 should be fully supported, 5.2 might be close on the speed constraint.

Adding extra conditions like "4K at 24 fps may work on L6.2" is just not something thats a useful statement.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders

Last edited by nevcairiel; 4th March 2015 at 20:50.
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2015, 21:03   #327  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,661
I'm on the opposite direction on this.

Sandybridge has a 1080p H.264 decoder capable of 1080p L5.2@300Mbps@100fps.

And because H.264 L5.2 supports up to 4K, does that mean that Sandy doesn't support H.264 L5.2 ?

NO. Definitely not in my opinion.
I could say it's more than capable of 1080p H.264 L5.2 decoding.

So, if GTX 960 can decode a 4K L6.2. 300Mbps at 80fps in DXVA copy-back, I could say it supports L6.2. with the resolution limit of 4K of course.
__________________
Win 10 x64 (18362.388) - Core i3-9100F - nVidia 1660 (436.15)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2015, 21:46   #328  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 9,793
The point is that these levels are designed to classify a decoder with one simple statement. Classifications are not exact, they are broad categories, so they don't tell you the entire picture, but they do tell you the *minimum* you can expect.
If I wanted to know exactly which limits it has, I would dig up a spec sheet, or run tests, or something.

The only classification valid for the GTX 960 decoder is Level 5.1, since none of the other levels are 100% supported.
This is also how the HEVC standard specifies these levels (and H.264 too). To quote: "A decoder that conforms to a given tier/level is required to be capable of decoding all bitstreams that are encoded for that tier/level and for all lower tiers/levels."

There is a definition so that everyone talking about it will talk about the same thing. Talking about anything else makes no sense, as its confusing at best and at worst mis-represents the facts.

Of course this doesn't mean it cannot decode a select assortment of streams using a higher level, and it can, but there is no classification to express that.
Strictly speaking the old H264 decoders are only L4.1, but that does not mean that they cannot decode 5.1/5.2 1080p streams. But they are not conforming to a full 5.2 decoder!

What you want is something that expresses their full potential, but something like that doesn't exist. The levels only express the minimum features it supports 100%, not the maximum.

PS:
"L6.2 with resolution limit to 4K" also is not correct, as L6.2 allows 300 fps at 4K, and it certainly isn't capable of that.
Do you see how you would need to limit this further and further? Might as well drop the level then and say "it can do 4K, 300 mbps at 80 fps", the level wouldn't add any information anymore.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders

Last edited by nevcairiel; 4th March 2015 at 21:54.
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2015, 05:36   #329  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,661
I can't disagree with you, especially when you refer to strict definitions, but I remember a time around my first posts here, when the H.264 decoders couldn't decode 1080p H.264 L5.1 streams.

What was the main reason ?

They couldn't handle the 16 Ref.

That feature was critical, because they couldn't play at all those clips.

So, a 1080p H.264 decoder which can't decode at all a certain clip due to the lack of an advanced feature of the level (like ref) does certainly not belong to that level.

So, when ATI fixed the driver for UVD2.2 in order to decode 16 Ref clips, they claimed 1080p L5.1 decoding capability, meaning they fixed the 16 Ref limitation which was critical and not the 300Mbps requirement of L5.1 or the 4K resolution.

Using the rules as strict as you do is one point of view, but in many cases a lot of people reading a GTX 960 is a L5.1 H.265 decoder would understand that they couldn't decode a 4K L6.2@60 fps at all, when we both agree that it can.

Update:

Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
Strictly speaking the old H264 decoders are only L4.1, but that does not mean that they cannot decode 5.1/5.2 1080p streams. But they are not conforming to a full 5.2 decoder!
Looking at the definition of H.264 levels, I'm afraid that your claim about old H264 decoders is not true.

The L4.1 asks for H.264 2048x1024@30fps support, that none of the 1080p old H.264 decoders provide.
The same restriction is true for L4.0

So, according to the strict rules you brought to our conversation, the old decoders like VP4 or QuickSync of SandyBridge are only L3.2 decoders (!)

This is both hilarious and ridiculous...It's completely meaningless and waste of time to talk again about strict level definitions.
__________________
Win 10 x64 (18362.388) - Core i3-9100F - nVidia 1660 (436.15)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all

Last edited by NikosD; 5th March 2015 at 07:57. Reason: Added new info about H.264 Levels
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2015, 14:35   #330  |  Link
iSunrise
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
5.2 may barely work depending on the complexity, but its only constrained by speed there, not any other features.
6 and up support higher resolutions (8K), which are not supported, so those levels are not supported.

A level is only supported if its fully supported, including speed and resolution constraints. 5.1 should be fully supported, 5.2 might be close on the speed constraint.
I basically read all the benchmarks of GM206 and after reading the relevant Wikipedia HEVC article, I could only guess that L5.1 was fully supported by GM206, while I was not sure about L5.2. Also, according to one NV slide the X1 SoC can only do HEVC 4K@30fps (which would conform to L5.0). These guesses were based upon the fact that the maximum resolution and fps for a specific Level was fully met.

So, when taking pre-encoded content into account and purely from a real-time playback perspective, L5.1/L5.2 looks like it's sufficient, which is probably also the reason why they (meaning NV, we will have to see about Intel with Skylake) went with that (Ultra HD Blu-Ray). Even for mobile devices, on current or a future SoC, video encoding/decoding 1080p@300fps and 2160p@120fps is more than enough. For encoding or any other usage scenarios, the more speed, the better, obviously.

We really need a table with confirmed specs and user tests (to see the limits) of devices.

PS:
I already did tests in the past with my iPhone 5s, which has limited 4K H.264 decoding capabilities. Up until today, I am not sure what decoding capabilities the iPhone 6 has, because no one really has tested that. And the iPhone is one of the most sold devices today. Apple only lists what they think is necessary for their needs, not the real capabilities of their PowerVR encoder/decoder that is integrated into their SoC (because it's not relevent for the majority).

Last edited by iSunrise; 5th March 2015 at 15:32.
iSunrise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th March 2015, 08:25   #331  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,661
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
From AnandTech GTX960 launch preview:


A full review is expected in the following days.
It's almost two months since the launch preview article about Nvidia GTX 960 in the Anandtech site.

Did they forget to review the card ?
__________________
Win 10 x64 (18362.388) - Core i3-9100F - nVidia 1660 (436.15)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th March 2015, 16:56   #332  |  Link
iSunrise
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikosD View Post
It's almost two months since the launch preview article about Nvidia GTX 960 in the Anandtech site.

Did they forget to review the card ?
Still no review, unfortunately.

BTW, NV seems to have added H.264 lossless support to their drivers (at least for Linux according to https://devtalk.nvidia.com/default/t...-349-12-beta-/). Does this mean that the performance is the same as with the H.264 lossy settings? They really surprise me, seems NV makes huge improvements when it comes to their hardware VDPAU feature-set or drivers respectively.
iSunrise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th March 2015, 21:17   #333  |  Link
P.J
🎸
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 513
I have never seen H.264 lossless but H.264/MPEG2 4:2:2
P.J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th March 2015, 20:13   #334  |  Link
P.J
🎸
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by ibius View Post
Cyberlink Video Decoder from PowerDVD v14 does support OpenCL H.265 hw-assisted video decoding and it is available to other DS players, it just has a 'do not use' merit.
You also have to set the decoder to use HAM-mode, don't remember if DXVA-mode would also use OpenCL hybrid decoding. When playing a HEVC video go to the Filters-tab, press and hold 'Ctrl'+'Left Mouse' on the 'Cyberlink Video Decoder (PDVD Generic)', it will open advanced/detailed settings view, the Profile column will tell you if the decoder is using OpenCL or not.
It wont use OpenCL on my GTX 550Ti, but does work on my brothers AMD Radeon HD 5700, too bad, because mine does a lot better on all my samples and tests.
But even in SW-mode I think it does even better than Lentoid and it also supports 10-bit, which Lentoid does not, and both are a LOT faster than LAVVideo x86, on my brothers x64-machine also LAVVideo x64 was slower than Cyberlink and Lentoid, of course it has an old AMD Phenom X4 2.6 Ghz with up to SSE4A instructions.

P.S. last LAV build I tested was 0.63.0.12, don't know how much faster 0.63.0.41 is, I did read it should have better error handling now.
No luck with GTX 960 too
P.J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2015, 19:38   #335  |  Link
vivan
/人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕ 人\
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Russia
Posts: 649
Multicoreware claim that their decoder is "the fastest, most reliable HEVC software decoder in the world". It's now (temporary, lol) available for free https://x265.com/store/index.php/download-free/ (it requires some stupid registration). Also it will screw file associations (since they know better than you that WMP is the best player ever) and maybe mess with merits or other things.
UPD: actually no need to install, just unpack and build graph using UHDcodeSrcFilter.dll and UHDcodeDecFilter.dll filters. But it still will require activation.

Of course this claim is wrong.
Beauty-2160p@30fps-12.3Mbps on i5-4670K:
LAV x64 (16 threads): 85 fps
LAV x64 (auto threads): 68 fps
MS MFT (DXVA): 46 fps
MCW x64: 42 fps

Last edited by vivan; 31st March 2015 at 20:38.
vivan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2015, 21:34   #336  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 9,793
They have been claiming that theirs is the fastest and only complete decoder for quite some time now, even after being informed of the state of the ffmpeg decoder. What can you do.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2015, 10:49   #337  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,661
UHDcode HEVC decoder evaluation (MultiCoreWare)

I've downloaded and used for a while the first public release of HEVC decoder by MultiCoreWare - UHDcode.

I have to thank Tom (aka x265_Project) from MCW for providing the app and the coupon, which is free right now as vivan wrote above at https://x265.com/store/index.php/checkout/cart/

Before benchmarks, I have some general comments to make:

1) There is no support of 10bit (main10 profile)

2) I couldn't manage to use the UHDcode HEVC plugin with .mkv, .ts or any other container besides .mp4.
So, it seems that right now it can be used only with elementary streams (.265, .h265, .hevc) and .mp4

3) There is no property sheet for the decoder nor for the splitter. So, for example I couldn't change the number of threads, although the decoder used all 8 threads.

4) The only way to actually use the decoder even with .mp4 files is only if you let the UHDcode splitter handle the .mp4 container.

In that way I couldn't enumerate both LAV video and UHDcode at the same time in DXVA Checker.
I had to change the preferred splitter for .mp4 between LAV and UHDcode splitters in order to test both decoders.

5) I tried to install it to my second Win 10 system with a Core 2 Quad processor, but it was already activated in my main system so I couldn't install it there.
It doesn't allow me to register the UHDcodeDecFilter.dll in a second system.

6) After the installation, the .mp4 files are associated with WMP

-----------------------------------------------------------------

All benchmarks were done on a Core i7 4790 with Win x64 8.1 Pro system, using latest DXVA Checker x64 v3.3.2 in Benchmark decode mode.

I used LAV Video x64 v0.64.38 , MPC Video Decoder x64 v1.4.4.265 , both using 16 threads and UHDcode v1.0.5.3/1.0.5.4


1. Girls -1080p60 fps -11Mbps


LAV x64 214/300/396 CPU 70%

MPC x64 216/298/379 CPU 70%

UHDcode 140/163/220 CPU 70%



2.Beauty-2160p@30fps-12.3Mbps

LAV x64 81/94/96 CPU 78%

MPC x64 80/93/96 CPU 78%

UHDcode 36/53/57 CPU 80%


Well, the numbers speak for themselves, I don't have to add anything.
For the same CPU utilization, the performance difference is huge on an AVX2 CPU at least.

P.S

In the package of the installer, it seems that there is an OpenCL component of UHDcode HEVC plugin which wasn't installed on my Intel iGPU system.
I don't know if it can be used with other dGPU cards by AMD and Nvidia.
__________________
Win 10 x64 (18362.388) - Core i3-9100F - nVidia 1660 (436.15)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all

Last edited by NikosD; 3rd April 2015 at 12:59. Reason: Added MPV Video Decoder - Disabled UHDcode splitter
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2015, 17:10   #338  |  Link
vivan
/人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕ 人\
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Russia
Posts: 649
Quote:
The UHDcode DirectShow filter supports all video resolutions and frame rates, but as most consumer video displays only support 8 bits/pixel, it is limited to HEVC Main profile. A professional version of UHDcode is available for professional products.
What a lame reason.
So they do have 10 bit decoder, but to get it you need to pay even more money.
vivan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2015, 21:48   #339  |  Link
x265_Project
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 596
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikosD View Post
All benchmarks were done on a Core i7 4790 with Win x64 8.1 Pro system, using latest DXVA Checker x64 v3.3.2 in Benchmark decode mode.

I used LAV Video x64 v0.64.38 using 16 threads and UHDcode v1.0.5.3/1.0.5.4

1. Girls -1080p60 fps -11Mbps

LAV x64 203/287/370 CPU 70%
UHDcode 140/163/220 CPU 70%

2.Beauty-2160p@30fps-12.3Mbps

LAV x64 81/94/96 CPU 78%
UHDcode 36/53/57 CPU 80%
Our UHDcode DirectShow filter wasn't designed for benchmarking this way. We've done performance testing against other open-source HEVC decoders, and UHDcode always compared favorably. The DirectShow filter is designed to decode frames and feed them to the player application as requested. It doesn't have a benchmarking mode where it would decode as fast as possible. I'll ask our team to try this out however.

BTW, UHDcode is OpenCL accelerated on the latest AMD discrete and APU integrated graphics, and we will to support Intel and NVIDIA platforms as soon as possible.
x265_Project is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2015, 21:49   #340  |  Link
x265_Project
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 596
Quote:
Originally Posted by vivan View Post
What a lame reason.
So they do have 10 bit decoder, but to get it you need to pay even more money.
Even more than zero?
x265_Project is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:48.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.