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. |
31st December 2013, 10:42 | #461 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,405
|
Thanks for the new version numbers. I am not sure if it is intended, but the information in the dll itself and VersionString() in AviSynth do not match. Currently there is:
VersionString(): AviSynth+ 0.1 (r1561, x86) FileProperties.ProductName: AviSynth+ 2.6 FileProperties.FileVersion: 2, 6, 0, 5 (and also some others - maybe you also want to change the home page) |
1st January 2014, 16:09 | #462 | Link | |
AVS+ Dev
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 359
|
Quote:
p.s. This is why I am against every plugin having a separate copy of the avisynth header. With possibly all other libraries around the world, if someone wants to compile an extension or application for that lib, they just use the headers from the library's sources by adding the core's public headers path to the compiler include dirs. Why can't AVS plugin devs do that too?
__________________
AviSynth+ |
|
1st January 2014, 16:38 | #463 | Link | |
Avisynth language lover
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,431
|
Quote:
|
|
1st January 2014, 17:58 | #464 | Link | |||
AVS+ Dev
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 359
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Which is kind of the point of always using the header from the avs(+) sources instead of making copies of it: 1) During compilation it will be obvious which Avs the plugin will be compatible with: that whose sources were used. 2) It'd avoid out-of-date headers of old plugins. 3) Plugins would automatically get (after a recompilation) all the fixes that go into the interface upstream. 4) It'd make it a lot less easy to mismatch header version with the intended/commonly used Avs version.
__________________
AviSynth+ Last edited by ultim; 1st January 2014 at 18:38. |
|||
2nd January 2014, 11:59 | #465 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: France
Posts: 2,309
|
Quote:
Any new release (ei 1576...) scheduled ? Last edited by jpsdr; 2nd January 2014 at 12:01. |
|
2nd January 2014, 16:40 | #466 | Link |
Software Developer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,248
|
Why not simply use an include path like "$(AVISYNTH_ROOT)\include" in your solution? Then the developer just needs to setup the environment variable AVISYNTH_ROOT properly and the solution file does not need to be modified at all...
__________________
Go to https://standforukraine.com/ to find legitimate Ukrainian Charities 🇺🇦✊ |
2nd January 2014, 19:52 | #467 | Link |
AVS+ Dev
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 359
|
Actually, I was just about to
So enjoy r1576. This is the fourth bugfix release in the current stable series, bringing you:
Okay, so much for the bugfixes. Boring but at least usefull. If you want something cool though, try out and help me test the new caching system in this experimental build. Make sure you rename the file to "avisynth.dll" if you try it out. The experimental build is mostly the same as the just released r1576, except that it has the new caches, so if you're doing comparisons, please compare the experimental build to the r1576 release in this post. The new caches have been written from scratch with MT in mind, and although MT is not yet active in this build, the new caches will (or should) provide similar performance to the stable release, but with significantly reduced memory consumption. Let me know your experiences. The sooner I can deem the new caches "good enough", the sooner we'll see MT
__________________
AviSynth+ Last edited by ultim; 2nd January 2014 at 20:02. |
5th January 2014, 06:16 | #472 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7
|
Today I decided to try out avs+ for the first time. Everything seems to be stable so I did some benchmark comparisons. I'm on an AMD system and since hardly any testing is being done with AMD I thought I might share. I also tested out the new caching build just posted a few days ago while I was at it.
My system is a FX8350 @4.4ghz with 8gb of ram @1600mhz running Win7 Pro x64. All builds of avs+ are x86. I ran 2 different scripts with AVSmeter 1.7.4. The first script I ran was a test script Groucho2004 posted up a few pages back. Going from Alpha5 to avs+ r1576 was a 50% speed increase! I'm guessing this has more to do with the improved core filters than anything else. From r1576 to the new cache build r1595 was a bit of a head scratcher though. The overall speed dropped just a hair while a second thread was created. Is this supposed to happen? As far as the memory usage it dropped by 155MB. Very nice. Code:
[Script] colorbars(width = 1920, height = 1080, pixel_type = "yv12").killaudio().assumefps(24000, 1001) trim(0,499) fadeio(248) trim(0,499) spline36resize(width() - 64, height() - 64).turnleft() spline64resize(width() + 64, height() + 64).turnright() bicubicresize(width() - 64, height() - 64).fliphorizontal() sincresize(width() + 64, height() + 64).flipvertical() a = tweak(hue=33) u_chroma = blankclip(utoy(a), color=$808080) ytouv(u_chroma, a.vtoy) mergeluma(a) tweak(hue=-33) temporalsoften(4,4,8,15,2) limiter(16, 235, 16, 240) levels(0, 1, 255, 16, 235) scriptclip("subtitle(string(ydifferencefromprevious))") a=selectevery(3, 0).addborders(0,0, 16,0).crop(0,0, -16,0) b=selectevery(3, 1).addborders(0,0, 32,0).crop(0,0, -32,0) c=selectevery(3, 2).addborders(0,0, 64,0).crop(0,0, -64,0) interleave(a, b, c) ---------------------------------------------------- [General info] Log file created with: AVSMeter 1.7.4 (AVS 2.6, x86) Avisynth version: AviSynth 2.60, build:Sep 18 2013 [17:36:36] [Clip info] Number of frames: 500 Length (hhh:mm:ss.ms): 000:00:20.854 Frame width: 1920 Frame height: 1080 Framerate: 23.976 (24000/1001) Interlaced: No Colorspace: YV12 [Runtime info] Frames processed: 500 (0 - 499) FPS (min | max | average): 2.16 | 11.68 | 4.77 CPU usage (average): 12% Thread count: 1 Physical Memory usage (peak): 467 MB Virtual Memory usage (peak): 464 MB Time (elapsed): 000:01:44.901 ---------------------------------------------------- [General info] Log file created with: AVSMeter 1.7.4 (AVS 2.6, x86) Avisynth version: AviSynth+ 0.1 (r1576, x86) [Clip info] Number of frames: 500 Length (hhh:mm:ss.ms): 000:00:20.854 Frame width: 1920 Frame height: 1080 Framerate: 23.976 (24000/1001) Interlaced: No Colorspace: YV12 [Runtime info] Frames processed: 500 (0 - 499) FPS (min | max | average): 3.03 | 13.95 | 7.55 CPU usage (average): 12% Thread count: 1 Physical Memory usage (peak): 485 MB Virtual Memory usage (peak): 480 MB Time (elapsed): 000:01:06.221 ---------------------------------------------------- [General info] Log file created with: AVSMeter 1.7.4 (AVS 2.6, x86) Avisynth version: AviSynth+ 0.1 (r1595, x86) [Clip info] Number of frames: 500 Length (hhh:mm:ss.ms): 000:00:20.854 Frame width: 1920 Frame height: 1080 Framerate: 23.976 (24000/1001) Interlaced: No Colorspace: YV12 [Runtime info] Frames processed: 500 (0 - 499) FPS (min | max | average): 1.49 | 13.71 | 7.44 CPU usage (average): 12% Thread count: 2 Physical Memory usage (peak): 330 MB Virtual Memory usage (peak): 324 MB Time (elapsed): 000:01:07.238 Code:
[Script] LoadPlugin("D:\Installs\Media\Video Encoding\MeGUI_2050_x86\tools\ffms\ffms2.dll") FFVideoSource("D:\Encodes\Kara no Kyoukai\5\Kara no Kyoukai 5.mkv", threads=1) Trim(2788, 3938) Dither_convert_8_to_16() Dither_resize16(848, 480) Dither_removegrain16() Dither_SmoothGrad() Dither_resize16(1920, 1080) DitherPost() ---------------------------------------------------- [General info] Log file created with: AVSMeter 1.7.4 (AVS 2.6, x86) Avisynth version: AviSynth 2.60, build:Sep 18 2013 [17:36:36] [Clip info] Number of frames: 1151 Length (hhh:mm:ss.ms): 000:00:48.006 Frame width: 1920 Frame height: 1080 Framerate: 23.976 (24000/1001) Interlaced: No Colorspace: YV12 [Runtime info] Frames processed: 1151 (0 - 1150) FPS (min | max | average): 13.16 | 22.03 | 21.47 CPU usage (average): 27% Thread count: 13 Physical Memory usage (peak): 592 MB Virtual Memory usage (peak): 595 MB Time (elapsed): 000:00:53.622 ---------------------------------------------------- [General info] Log file created with: AVSMeter 1.7.4 (AVS 2.6, x86) Avisynth version: AviSynth+ 0.1 (r1576, x86) [Clip info] Number of frames: 1151 Length (hhh:mm:ss.ms): 000:00:48.006 Frame width: 1920 Frame height: 1080 Framerate: 23.976 (24000/1001) Interlaced: No Colorspace: YV12 [Runtime info] Frames processed: 1151 (0 - 1150) FPS (min | max | average): 2.86 | 23.25 | 21.33 CPU usage (average): 25% Thread count: 13 Physical Memory usage (peak): 714 MB Virtual Memory usage (peak): 716 MB Time (elapsed): 000:00:53.966 ---------------------------------------------------- [General info] Log file created with: AVSMeter 1.7.4 (AVS 2.6, x86) Avisynth version: AviSynth+ 0.1 (r1595, x86) [Clip info] Number of frames: 1151 Length (hhh:mm:ss.ms): 000:00:48.006 Frame width: 1920 Frame height: 1080 Framerate: 23.976 (24000/1001) Interlaced: No Colorspace: YV12 [Runtime info] Frames processed: 1151 (0 - 1150) FPS (min | max | average): 12.87 | 22.27 | 21.71 CPU usage (average): 26% Thread count: 13 Physical Memory usage (peak): 146 MB Virtual Memory usage (peak): 148 MB Time (elapsed): 000:00:53.016 |
6th January 2014, 00:19 | #473 | Link | |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 5,034
|
Quote:
Code:
Avisynth version: AviSynth 2.60, build:Sep 18 2013 [17:36:36] FPS (min | max | average): 3.72 | 22.39 | 10.54 (+121%) Avisynth version: AviSynth+ 0.1 (r1576, x86) FPS (min | max | average): 4.53 | 26.45 | 13.06 (+73%) Avisynth version: AviSynth+ 0.1 (r1595, x86) FPS (min | max | average): 2.27 | 26.31 | 13.11 (+76%) One more note - The experimental DLL created 5 threads (well, 4 threads really, 1 is for the calling process, AVSMeter) in my case, not 2. Odd. Last edited by Groucho2004; 6th January 2014 at 01:19. Reason: snr |
|
6th January 2014, 08:15 | #475 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,646
|
Yeah, Intel completely dominates in this area, i7's with hyperthreading enabled using an MT build are most certainly king, I wouldn't buy an AMD machine for Avisynth processing, I highly doubt AMD's 8 cores
could even compete with most i5's let alone i7's and they'd use more energy to accomplish the same task too. That said, I wouldn't mind seeing a thread that compared various scripts on different processors so that would could make more informed decisions on what hardware to buy. |
7th January 2014, 01:28 | #476 | Link |
AVS+ Dev
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 359
|
DrZine, Groucho2004: Yes, those threads are normal. They are threadpool threads from the MT version, but in this particular build they just sleep/idle and do nothing, because this build is only meant to test the caches.
__________________
AviSynth+ |
11th January 2014, 22:32 | #479 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 23
|
Perhaps BBA163 is referring to, "An official release which will add support for 64-bit AviSynth+ is expected soon." As mentioned on the avisynth+ get started page.
Btw r1595 x86 has generally been working fine for me with avspmod and encoding. Mostly just a few cache_child errors from incompatible filters. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|