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 19th November 2016, 10:32   #40241  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by imhh11 View Post
shortcuts are still not working for me.
Do you have an Optimus system?

Do you have any 3rd party software running which might also access the GPU, like f.lux, FRAPS, GpuZ or something like that? Or maybe some sort of debugger or something?

Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
i'm just asking and hope it is not true. is there a possibility that NGU needs a ton of Vram?
GPU queue of 4 (i'm using 8 normally)

i need 3.5 gb Vram with NGU high and i need 2.5 gb Vram with XBR 100.
With which source video size? NGU does consume some more Vram, that's true. But it should be a "fixed" cost, meaning it should be independent of the GPU queue size.

Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
edit:
the MPC-HC screenshoot function took the wrong source frame for what ever reasons.
and it was NGU med -> XBR 100 -> spline 3 AR

i forgot that quadrupling was a thing...
and nnedi3 256 with SR 4 doesn't look better: https://img1.picload.org/image/rdwlwgdg/nnedi3sr4.png
they look like clones...

here the correct source screen: https://abload.de/img/source2beugl.png (i will replace it in the comparison post too )
i guess the problem comes from using the old render path. just a guess the new render path is still broken on win 10.
I'm not completely sure how this related to the other problems you mentioned? Does this have anything to do with the high VRam usage or the slow render times?

About slow render times: Are you using any custom flush settings? Have you tried resetting madVR to default settings as a test?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyberscott View Post
Below are some quick runs comparing NGU to NNEDI3 64.
NGU does look real good so far on 1080p videos. Will check lower resolution later.
Thanks!

NGU High runs slower for you than expected. But not as slow as huhn reported.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fedpul View Post
Now for doubling I must say WOW!!! It is incredibly good but incredibly taxing too, for some references, I can double Luma and Chroma a 1080p movie with NGU Medium, and downscale it using SSIM 1D with render times about 30ms, but with NGU High render times go past 100ms and I can't notice the difference in IQ.
The difference between NGU Medium and High in image quality isn't all that dramatic, so it's not a big problem if you can't use High. How does performance compare to NNEDI3?

Quote:
Originally Posted by trip_let View Post
Maybe it's just me but I'm wondering if a lighter value of "soften edges" and also "add grain" could be offered (between off and 1). When scaling very low-resolution content the differences can be fairly visibly substantial. There may be some utility in a smaller nonzero setting.
So just some lighter settings would do the trick? We don't need more settings in between the current settings, I hope?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkauff View Post
I can easily double 480p and 720p sources at high quality with my GTX 1060, but on 1080p even the "medium" setting gives me about one frame drop per second. I've been using NNEDI3 32 neurons with no problems. So don't get rid of NNEDI3 until a slightly more efficient version of NGU is available.

Also a caution. NGU works great on D3D 9, but I get massive frame drops on everything at both NGU strengths when using D3D 11. This is on Win 10 Anniversary Edition. Not an issue for me, but if people run into the same problem, this is why. Maybe for now you should disable D3D 11 if NGU is in use.

Love the results, though! Great work.

EDIT: 1080p now works with no drops with NGU medium. I just had to turn off SuperRes (which was at 1).
SuperRes doesn't seem to be beneficial for NGU, anyway.

Are you saying that the option "use D3D11 for presentation" makes problems when using NGU, but makes no problems when using other image doublers?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian View Post
NGU looks very nice! I really like NGU High doubling with animated content.

Nvidia Titan X (Pascal) 375.95, Windows 10 x64 14965.rs_prerelease.161104-1700, I also used the test build of madVR (91b). Final resolution 2560x1440.

Default settings except using windowed overlay, ED1 dithering, and a 3DLUT. Chroma upscaling = Bicubic75, Image upscaling = Lanczos3, Image downscaling = Bicubic100. This is total average rendering times without any empty files with funny names.

Code:
Titan X (Pascal)

Luma doubling
1920x1080p24 (2038 MHz)
NNEDI3 256 - 28.6 ms
NNEDI3 128 - 16.7 ms
NGU High   - 18.0 ms

1920x1080p24 (1430 MHz)
NNEDI3 64  - 13.8 ms
NNEDI3 32  - 9.9  ms
NGU Med    - 9.7  ms

1280x720p24 (1430 MHz)
NNEDI3 32  - 5.8  ms
NNEDI3 64  - 7.5  ms
NNEDI3 128 - 11.4 ms
NGU High   - 12.0 ms
NGU Med    - 5.6  ms

Luma and Chroma doubling
1280x720p24 (2038 MHz)
NNEDI3 128+128 - 19.5 ms
NGU High+High  - 21.6 ms
Thanks for the detailed speed comparison. Once again, NGU High performs slower than expected. It does perform near to NNEDI3 64 with my 7750, so I expected similar results with higher performing GPUs, too. Maybe I do have to use D3D11 for NGU (when it's available) to speed things up, I don't know...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryrynz View Post
First thoughts on NGU.. Jesus it's sharp. Thins lines more than I like.. I find I have to use a soft scaler like softcubic 50 to tone it down to something that actually looks natural, but I'll play with the edge softening as well and see how I go.

Yeah soften edges is a must for lower resolution animated content I can stick with Jinc when using soften edges.

The question is if I can make things look better than my anime setup current combo, lot's of screenshots tonight I think..
Weren't you the one who was using AviSynth to thin lines? And now you say NGU thins likes *too much*? Sounds surprising. Do you have some screenshots for me?

Generally, NGU was optimized for upscaling content that was downscaled by using gamma light from the original highres master. If the studio (or custom encode) actually downscaled things in linear light, NGU will produce lines that are too thin. So maybe that's what's happening here. I was planning to offer a "linear light" switch for NGU at some point, which will be optimized for images that were downscaled using linear light. But it'll be some time before I get to that.

In all my tests with downscaling a "groundtruth" image (in gamma light, though!) and then upscaling it with NGU, NGU always produced lines in exactly the right width. They were never too thin. Are you sure you aren't just used to bloated lines?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryrynz View Post
Yes, NNEDI3 is softer but I can work with that through post processing it doesn't deform lines as much as NGU and is cleaner to boot which to me is far more important than anything else.
Strange. Of course NNEDI3 alone without SuperRes is much much softer (and thus "cleaner") than NGU. But if you apply SuperRes level 4, which is necessary to get as near to the "groundtruth" as possible, NGU is in my tests pretty much always cleaner and more truthful than NNEDI3+SuperRes4.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anima123 View Post
Finally, I figured out in which circumstances the OSD will reject to show.

When run mpc-be directly, ctrl-J will show the OSD correctly. However, if I start mpc-be via 'Run with graphics processor' with my GTX880m, the OSD failed to show when ctrl-J pressed.

This is quite weird behavior I never met before. BTW, I do have Optimus with this laptop, if it means something to the developer for debugging.
Oh, that's very interesting! I'll create a special log build to analyze this.
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 10:38   #40242  |  Link
ryrynz
Registered User
 
ryrynz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnckane View Post
Btw. I tried this new NGU algorithm. Does anybody else notice a high pitching noise coming from the VGA when this algorithm is enabled ? It's like when you are in a game and there is 500+ FPS in the menu.
That's called coil whine, it's related to the quality of the design/parts in your graphics card. Best to avoid whatever manufacturer made that card in future.. you could try overclocking it, it may help.
ryrynz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:04   #40243  |  Link
Sunset1982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 280
Performance Tests

Hey Madshi!

Thank you very much for the new madvr version.

I did some quick performance test:

Test System: i5 6600, 16GB RAM, RX480 8GB, Crimson 16.11.4, Windows 10, madvr 0.91.b

File: Avatar 1920x1080p, 23,976, 8 Bit, MKV file upscaled to 3840x2160p



Old Settings:
Chroma: SuperXBR 125, AR
Luma: image doubling Superxbr 25 AB
+ Super Res 2
= 28ms


Changed Luma Doubling to NNEDI64, no Super Res:
=30ms


Changed Luma Doubling to NGU High:
=84ms


Changed Luma Doubling to NGU Med:
=36ms


Setting Chroma and Luma doubling to NGU Med:
=60ms

Setting Luma and Chroma to both use doubling @ NGU Med:
=97ms




Using Chroma Rconstuction Soft and Luma NGU med:
=36ms
Using Chroma Rconstuction Soft and NNEDI64:
=32ms


Using Chroma Rconstuction Soft and NNEDI128:
=61 ms



Conclusion:

NGU is to performance hungry for my system. I can only use it with medium setting, with chroma set to SXBR or RecSoft
__________________
Intel i5 6600, 16 GB DDR4, AMD Vega RX56 8 GB, Windows 10 x64, Kodi DS Player 17.6, MadVR (x64), LAV Filters (x64), XySubfilter .746 (x64)
LG 4K OLED (65C8D), Denon X-4200 AVR, Dali Zensor 5.1 Set

Last edited by Sunset1982; 19th November 2016 at 11:06.
Sunset1982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:09   #40244  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
Ok, two RX480 users now with very bad performance results. I smell a pattern. So my current impression is:

1) NVidia: a bit slower than expected.
2) RX480: a *lot* slower than expected.
3) All older AMD generations: just as fast as expected.

Will do some tests on my NVidia soon. Don't have an RX480 to test with, though.
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:14   #40245  |  Link
ryrynz
Registered User
 
ryrynz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Weren't you the one who was using AviSynth to thin lines? And now you say NGU thins likes *too much*? Sounds surprising. Do you have some screenshots for me?
Thin them to a point, NNEDI3 tightens them to some degree but it's not enough to look high definition so I take it further but Awarpsharp achieves is consistent and natural and works very well with NNEDI3.
I'll post some up later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Generally, NGU was optimized for upscaling content that was downscaled by using gamma light from the original highres master. If the studio (or custom encode) actually downscaled things in linear light, NGU will produce lines that are too thin. So maybe that's what's happening here. I was planning to offer a "linear light" switch for NGU at some point, which will be optimized for images that were downscaled using linear light. But it'll be some time before I get to that.
Best the screenshots do the telling, along certain lines things thin where they shouldn't. NNEDI3 keeps the lines thickness consistent and without NNEDI3 enabled you can see that that's how they should be but NGU just seems to like
really constricting particular areas so that they no longer match the original line thickness and I don't like that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
In all my tests with downscaling a "groundtruth" image (in gamma light, though!) and then upscaling it with NGU, NGU always produced lines in exactly the right width. They were never too thin. Are you sure you aren't just used to bloated lines?
Pretty sure, I like things as sharp as they can be without looking unnatural, fat lines aren't nice but over thinned lines are worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Strange. Of course NNEDI3 alone without SuperRes is much much softer (and thus "cleaner") than NGU. But if you apply SuperRes level 4, which is necessary to get as near to the "groundtruth" as possible, NGU is in my tests pretty much always cleaner and more truthful than NNEDI3+SuperRes4.
I've seen impressive results on the forum, that Mononoke image upscale is amazing, but I don't get the same results with my content and thus haven't found any reason to run SuperRes, it just ends up looking over sharpened even with the lowest setting.
ryrynz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:18   #40246  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
Do you have a "groundtruth" to compare to in any of your tests? Maybe an old SD encoding of some anime for which a Blu-Ray is now available?
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:19   #40247  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
With which source video size? NGU does consume some more Vram, that's true. But it should be a "fixed" cost, meaning it should be independent of the GPU queue size.
1080p. it looks a lot better since the reset.
it is most likely independent of the GPU queue it was still very high

Quote:
I'm not completely sure how this related to the other problems you mentioned? Does this have anything to do with the high VRam usage or the slow render times?
when i'm running out of Vram i will get high rendertimes too so maybe.
GPU Vram usages in GPU-z is not reliable it could be out of ram even with numbers like 3.6 GB of 4 GB.

Quote:
About slow render times: Are you using any custom flush settings? Have you tried resetting madVR to default settings as a test?
resetting settings helped as far as i can see. the flush settings where default i tried different settings later.
ShowRenderStep works like a handbrake for NGU.

FHD -> UHD 23p luma only
i get about 26-30 ms with NGU med now not sure how much NGU is eating. NGU high is using ~100 ms
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:25   #40248  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
resetting settings helped as far as i can see. the flush settings where default i tried different settings later.
ShowRenderStep works like a handbrake for NGU.

FHD -> UHD 23p luma only
i get about 26-30 ms with NGU med now not sure how much NGU is eating. NGU high is using ~100 ms
Yes, ShowRenderStep does slow things down, which is why it's a "hidden" option and shouldn't be turned on by default.

You reported earlier 22ms for NGU med. So it seems to be even slower now?? Or are you testing a different resolution now? The most important thing is not the speed by itself, but the speed compared to NNEDI3, to have a good reference point. So how do NGU med/high compare to NNEDI3 now?
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:29   #40249  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnckane View Post
Btw. I tried this new NGU algorithm. Does anybody else notice a high pitching noise coming from the VGA when this algorithm is enabled ? It's like when you are in a game and there is 500+ FPS in the menu.
Yes, I got this too. Normally madVR causes just some electric buzzing and not this high "coil whine" sound, which is very strange.
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:42   #40250  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Yes, ShowRenderStep does slow things down, which is why it's a "hidden" option and shouldn't be turned on by default.

You reported earlier 22ms for NGU med. So it seems to be even slower now?? Or are you testing a different resolution now? The most important thing is not the speed by itself, but the speed compared to NNEDI3, to have a good reference point. So how do NGU med/high compare to NNEDI3 now?
that was NGU only without any other renderstep using showrendertimes because everyone has different chroma scaler and stuff like that. didn't worked out...

FHD -> UHD normal rendertimes
NGU med 25-30 ms
nnedi64 32 ms
NGU high ~80-100ms
nnedi3 256 110ms
nnedi3 128 55ms


NGU med is about 10 ms faster now since i disabled showrenerstep and reset all settings. NGU high doesn't seem to care.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:46   #40251  |  Link
Sunset1982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 280
ok, had showrendersteps activated too.

Performance is a bit better now:

can use NGU med with chroma and luma. 30ms

choma reconstruction soft and double luma with NGU med: 23ms
choma reconstruction soft and double luma with NGU high: 59ms


sadly, NGU high is still to much for my rx480.

I will do some more testings tomorrow. To bad, I have to work tonight...
__________________
Intel i5 6600, 16 GB DDR4, AMD Vega RX56 8 GB, Windows 10 x64, Kodi DS Player 17.6, MadVR (x64), LAV Filters (x64), XySubfilter .746 (x64)
LG 4K OLED (65C8D), Denon X-4200 AVR, Dali Zensor 5.1 Set
Sunset1982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:48   #40252  |  Link
ryrynz
Registered User
 
ryrynz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Do you have a "groundtruth" to compare to in any of your tests? Maybe an old SD encoding of some anime for which a Blu-Ray is now available?
For one I do, my settings including Avisynth actually produced a fairly similar image. Anyway I have a screenshot that kinda shows what I'm talking about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
Yes, I got this too. Normally madVR causes just some electric buzzing and not this high "coil whine" sound, which is very strange.
It depends on the type of load required by the card, generally the harder it has to work the louder the whine. Best thing you can try and do to minimize it is try overclocking or just replace the card with one that doesn't do it.

Madshi,
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/191145

This is with Lanczos 3 as second upscaler, normally I'd use Jinc but w/e, this kinda helps exacerbate the issues anyway..
This is just clean NNEDI3 64 vs NGU HQ SE1, SE2 is just too blurry to be used for any real comparison.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunset1982 View Post
sadly, NGU high is still to much for my rx480.
That sucks, my 960 breezes through it, doesn't use much more performance than NNEDI3 64 neurons, extra few ms render time that's it =/
I've only tested 480 > 1080 though..

Last edited by ryrynz; 19th November 2016 at 11:53.
ryrynz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:48   #40253  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
that was NGU only without any other renderstep using showrendertimes because everyone has different chroma scaler and stuff like that. didn't worked out...

FHD -> UHD normal rendertimes
NGU med 25-30 ms
nnedi64 32 ms
NGU high ~80-100ms
nnedi3 256 110ms
nnedi3 128 55ms


NGU med is about 10 ms faster now since i disabled showrenerstep and reset all settings. NGU high doesn't seem to care.
Still far from what you should get. I don't suppose it helps if you switch the first flush setting "after intermediate render steps" to "don't flush", does it? Does turning on/off "use D3D11 for presentation" or "use separate device for presentation" make any noticeable difference at all?
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:52   #40254  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunset1982 View Post
ok, had showrendersteps activated too.

Performance is a bit better now:

can use NGU med with chroma and luma. 30ms

choma reconstruction soft and double luma with NGU med: 23ms
choma reconstruction soft and double luma with NGU high: 59ms
As I said (multiple times now). The performance by itself doesn't matter. I need NNEDI3 comparison, otherwise there's no reference point to compare to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryrynz View Post
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/191145

This is with Lanczos 3 as second upscaler, normally I'd use Jinc but w/e, this kinda helps exacerbate the issues anyway..
This is just clean NNEDI3 64 vs NGU HQ SE1, SE2 is just too blurry to be used for any real comparison.
That looks pretty ugly. I don't really see an issue with lines being too thin here, though. What I do see is that NGU hates compression artifacts. But I suppose you'll probably get somewhat similar results when using NNEDI3 + SuperRes 4?
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 11:57   #40255  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Still far from what you should get. I don't suppose it helps if you switch the first flush setting "after intermediate render steps" to "don't flush", does it? Does turning on/off "use D3D11 for presentation" or "use separate device for presentation" make any noticeable difference at all?


"don't flush" no change.
"use separate device for presentation" no change
using D3D9 present in advance with FSE instead of D3D11 gave me maybe an 1 ms but NGU rendertimes are unstable anyway.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 12:00   #40256  |  Link
ryrynz
Registered User
 
ryrynz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
That looks pretty ugly. I don't really see an issue with lines being too thin here, though. What I do see is that NGU hates compression artifacts. But I suppose you'll probably get somewhat similar results when using NNEDI3 + SuperRes 4?
There's an O on his helmet, looking at the top line of that right in the middle you can see NGU really thinning that area far more than it should.

SuperRes4 looks even nastier but then it doesn't thin the lines, naturally.

So you could see why I'd prefer NNEDI3, after Awarpsharp etc has taken care of it I get a very nice sharp & clean image.
ryrynz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 12:05   #40257  |  Link
Sunset1982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 280
some quick tests:

Chroma & Luma doubling both @ NGU med: 32ms
Chroma & Luma doubling both @ NGU high: 79 ms
Chroma & Luma doubling both @ NNEDI32: 25 ms
Chroma & Luma doubling both @ NNEDI64: 36ms

Chroma @ NGU med & Luma doubling @ NGU High: 60ms

luma & Chroma doubling set to NGU high (luma) and NGU med: 78 ms


So, still NGU high is no option on rx480 yet.
__________________
Intel i5 6600, 16 GB DDR4, AMD Vega RX56 8 GB, Windows 10 x64, Kodi DS Player 17.6, MadVR (x64), LAV Filters (x64), XySubfilter .746 (x64)
LG 4K OLED (65C8D), Denon X-4200 AVR, Dali Zensor 5.1 Set
Sunset1982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 12:13   #40258  |  Link
ryrynz
Registered User
 
ryrynz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunset1982 View Post
some quick tests
I wouldn't even bother with chroma doubling with this in it's current state, but that's me.. not sure if it'll make enough of a change in performance for you to run it. But like madshi said, there isn't a huge visual difference between medium and high. But I guess you're just testing rather than anything else..
ryrynz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 12:20   #40259  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryrynz View Post
There's an O on his helmet, looking at the top line of that right in the middle you can see NGU really thinning that area far more than it should.
I see what you mean. However, why is that part of the O gray in the source and not black, like the rest of the O? If the whole O had the same line thickness and line color in the source, NGU wouldn't "focus" some parts of the O but not others.

In order to properly upscale low-res images to hi-res in a way to get as near to the groundtruth as possible, NGU needs to decide which lines in the source were likely bloated through downscaling and were much thinner in the original hi-res image, and which lines were already thick in the hi-res source. NGU can't just thin all lines by a certain factor (as awarpsharp does). While that might produce pleasing results for very low quality anime sources with high compression artifacts, it would produce results very far from the groundtruth for high quality sources.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryrynz View Post
SuperRes4 looks even nastier but then it doesn't thin the lines, naturally.
That's "good" to hear. So it's really mostly caused by the bad source quality. I think what you need most of all is a good algorithm to remove compression artifacts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunset1982 View Post
some quick tests:

Chroma & Luma doubling both @ NGU med: 32ms
Chroma & Luma doubling both @ NGU high: 79 ms
Chroma & Luma doubling both @ NNEDI32: 25 ms
Chroma & Luma doubling both @ NNEDI64: 36ms

So, still NGU high is no option on rx480 yet.
Ok, so no joy with the RX480, for some weird reason.

I'll try my luck with D3D11 shaders, maybe that solves the issue.
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2016, 12:23   #40260  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
well maybe wait for a working RX 480 driver...

i would down grade to a better driver but i can't remember a driver that doesn't have serious issues and is working with the RX 480.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
direct compute, dithering, error diffusion, madvr, ngu, nnedi3, quality, renderer, scaling, uhd upscaling, upsampling

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 20:57.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.