Evaluation of HEVC decoders (SW, Hybrid and HW) - Page 64

CruNcher · 3rd September 2016, 01:08

Most Probably behind one of the uknowns is the VP9 Decoder some time now past since their announcement that it's going to be enabled and yet nothing happened officially

While Intel as well as Nvidia are running, the disadvantage of low resources to work with you could guess.

Overall Polaris DSP really looks like just being in the R&D state of the Previous VPX (Maxwell) and Intel far far ahead of both again (Tegra,Maxwell,Pascal,Polaris).

I really wonder how much sense it really makes to keep that fixed function unit of Nvidias and AMds in a Intel System it makes no real sense efficiency wise especially in the upcoming Kaby Lake Systems it's just pure unneeded overhead on the discrete side and the valuable Wafer space could be used for more 3d and compute logic or to make the grid even denser.

I guess AMD has planned to release/enable VP9 Decoding support officially with the upcoming Polaris 10 Notebook Reviews and supplied Drivers.

NikosD · 3rd September 2016, 04:17

Yes, but is the late Polaris VP9 decoder a fixed-fuction decoder like Maxwell's with 960 card which Nvidia enabled some time later than the initial release of 960 or a hybrid decoder ?

Of course as long as Chrome official releases don't support VP9 HW decoder, all the other uses of VP9 are insignificant.

Only Edge supports VP9 HW decoder.

But the difference between a hybrid and a HW decoder is not insignificant.

Trevonn · 3rd September 2016, 06:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by CruNcher

I really wonder how much sense it really makes to keep that fixed function unit of Nvidias and AMds in a Intel System it makes no real sense efficiency wise especially in the upcoming Kaby Lake Systems it's just pure unneeded overhead on the discrete side and the valuable Wafer space could be used for more 3d and compute logic or to make the grid even denser.

It makes complete sense considering Intel has only just delivered a Hardware decoder for HEVC 10-bit, VP9 when you could have had one from NVIDIA all the way back in January 2015 (VP9 Enabled in December 2015). Plus nobody upgrades their CPU that regularly unlike GPUs because it's a waste of money.

Let's not leave yet another industry to stagnating Intel

rbej · 4th September 2016, 07:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by NikosD

I really like all of you guys that after you tell me your off-topic story you call me for writing off-topic.

But you really overcome everyone here by telling me what to say in my own thread and to search somewhere else to write.

It couldn't be more funny.

The truth is that AMD is going to kick for good some @sses and all the fan boys of Nvidia and Intel are desperate and nervous.

Vega will just destroy Pascal for sure, it's another class it will show no mercy.

The same thing is gonna happen to Kabylake.

All of the AAA titles are already DX12 and Vulkan or they are going to get a patch soon.

The rest of the games are simply not interesting.

Most of the apps nowadays are getting a serious boost going hyperthteading, meaning getting 8 threads for 4 real cores.

Just imagine how fast will be 8 real ZEN cores with 16 threads.

Poor Intel...

Poor Nvidia...

2017 will be the year of AMD.

Case closed.

Very funny joke . Today is 1 April??.

You must very "love" AMD, if you realy believe in this.

ashlar42 · 6th September 2016, 10:57

What would currently be the most cost effective solution to build a Windows 10 based HTPC, with 4K and HEVC decoding capabilities? I ask here since you seem to be trying all combinations. Thank you.

huhn · 6th September 2016, 14:39

the cheapest card is the rx 460. for UHD presentation you should get a GPU with at least 3GB of vram.

JohnLai · 7th September 2016, 04:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by huhn

the cheapest card is the rx 460. for UHD presentation you should get a GPU with at least 3GB of vram.

I disagree with rx 460....the better card would be nvidia gtx 1050 (4gb variant, not yet released) or 1060 3gb.

Don't forget Pascal series support HEVC 8,10 and 12 bits decoding in hardware. Beside, it has been confirmed through nvidia Video Codec SDK that pascal also support VP9 Profile 0 decoding in hardware too.

AMD Polaris only supports 8 and 10 bit HEVC....and there is conflicting info about vp9 support whether it is hybrid or full fixed hardware mode.

EDIT: Oh great, assuming if VCE used in Bristol Ridge is the same as Polaris, then according to http://techreport.com/review/30619/a...d-am4-platform , VP9 support is limited to 1080p content. Meanwhile Pascal could support up to 4k and 8 k VP9 decoding....., what a bummer....

huhn · 7th September 2016, 15:47

you should read the question.

and the RC 460 is not the cheapest card that can decode HEVC?

JohnLai · 7th September 2016, 16:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by huhn

you should read the question.

and the RC 460 is not the cheapest card that can decode HEVC?

Cheapest but not the best value for video decoding functionality.

huhn · 7th September 2016, 16:25

so card for double the money that can theoretically decode 12 bit which isn't even part of the DXVA spec is better?

P.J · 7th September 2016, 20:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnLai

Cheapest but not the best value for video decoding functionality.

Maybe good for 4k h.265 @60fps while 960/950 are better.

I would get 1050/1060 for video or waiting for Kaby Lake.

JohnLai · 8th September 2016, 03:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by huhn

so card for double the money that can theoretically decode 12 bit which isn't even part of the DXVA spec is better?

What make you think Microsoft won't update the spec?

Even if Microsoft doesn't update the spec, Nvidia might do it via their CUVID/NVDECODE API. (Seem nvidia does update its cuda decoder)

huhn · 8th September 2016, 08:19

there is no commercial 12 bit content. even if they are adding it you are unlikely to really need it any time soon.

the last CUVID "update" i know of was just a repack. CUVID has some serious issues on windows 10 on top.

they have a lot todo maybe adding 10 bit is a start...
the problem that only nvidia can do it in theory will slow this down too. commercial product will stay away from it for better compatibility.

Paul Tronc · 8th September 2016, 08:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by huhn

native
madVR GPU queue at 4 present queue 3 1600 mb BLACK SCREEN in full screen.
EVR CP queue 4 1780 mb

a difference of 100 of mb each time are pretty normal.
get more than 2 gb that's all i have to say to this.

the default GPU queue for madVR is 8 which is unusable for UHD with 2 GB Vram. the default GPU queue for EVR is 5 or 6.

GPU usages was ~70% with both EVR and madVR. madVR was at default except queue and FSE mode.

Quote:

Originally Posted by huhn

the cheapest card is the rx 460. for UHD presentation you should get a GPU with at least 3GB of vram.

Hello, I just have purchased a 960GTX 2Gb in order to get full hardware 4K HEVC decoding in madvr. Are you saying that it won't work because of lack of memory?

huhn · 8th September 2016, 12:04

if you are going to use it to display UHD AT UHD resolution.

you could run out of Vram.

in term of madVR you are relatively lucky. you can lower the GPU queue. but deinterlanced content can't be deinterlanced by madVR like this and other issues can show up.

with default madVR settings it will not work.
i'm really regretting buying the 2G version of the 960.

you are totally fine on a 1080p screen (i planned this card for a 1080p screen). just to make that clear.

Paul Tronc · 8th September 2016, 13:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by huhn

you are totally fine on a 1080p screen (i planned this card for a 1080p screen). just to make that clear.

I'm relieved to read this. Actually my brand new projector is 1080p, so I want to downscale UHD content. But it still have to figure out how the video decoding chain works, because I'm using SVP (frc tool triggered via avisynth) together with madvr. I can't say whether SVP is working on 4K resolution or 1080p on my current setup, when I play 4k on my 1080p diffuser. I'd like to get SVP working smoothly on UHD content, together with madvr. I just received the 960/2Gb, paid ~100 bucks (used). Still have to clean all radeon software and switch to this Nvidia card before I can tell how it behaves.

Paul Tronc · 9th September 2016, 08:53

All right,

My first tests using GTX 960 + HEVC + Madvr 32 + Lav Filter 32 + 1080p diffuser are very positive. That's simple, I could'nt find the decoding limit of my setup. I launched the http://jell.yfish.us/ 400mbps 4k uhd hevc 10bit video, I get a perfect rendering using my standard Madvr settings. The only limitation is the downscaling algorithm, it seems like I have to stay on bicubic. Any other algorithm will cause frame dropping.

I suspect the jellyfish samples to be not fully representative of a high bitrate video, it looks too easy to be true. I tried another 2016p 60fps 50Mbps video, no problem : http://demo-uhd3d.com/fiche.php?cat=uhd&id=90

Next steps, I want to try :

- DXVA checker benchmark
- same tests on my 1440p display
- adding frc (SVP) to get 60fps (I don't understand why SVP/avisynth don't see HEVC files, there must be a wrong setting somewhere)

If you have another suggestion for a stronger stress test...

v0lt · 9th September 2016, 19:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Tronc

If you have another suggestion for a stronger stress test...

Netflix_TunnelFlag_4096x2160_60fps_x265_8bit_700Mbit.mkv

huhn · 9th September 2016, 20:27

close i get ~59 FPS in decode mode.

Paul Tronc · 10th September 2016, 11:00

Netflix_TunnelFlag is not smooth on my 1440p display, I'll check later on my 1080p one. I tried with MPC HC 32, MPC-BE 64, PotPLayer 64, each time with Madvr.

I'm currently encoding a 1080p BluRay to HEVC at 190fps, CPU usage 7% , GPU usage 6%, GPU temp 50°C with the fans off. Pretty impressive.

3rd September 2016, 01:08	#1261 \| Link
CruNcher Registered User Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Germany Posts: 4,926	Most Probably behind one of the uknowns is the VP9 Decoder some time now past since their announcement that it's going to be enabled and yet nothing happened officially While Intel as well as Nvidia are running, the disadvantage of low resources to work with you could guess. Overall Polaris DSP really looks like just being in the R&D state of the Previous VPX (Maxwell) and Intel far far ahead of both again (Tegra,Maxwell,Pascal,Polaris). I really wonder how much sense it really makes to keep that fixed function unit of Nvidias and AMds in a Intel System it makes no real sense efficiency wise especially in the upcoming Kaby Lake Systems it's just pure unneeded overhead on the discrete side and the valuable Wafer space could be used for more 3d and compute logic or to make the grid even denser. I guess AMD has planned to release/enable VP9 Decoding support officially with the upcoming Polaris 10 Notebook Reviews and supplied Drivers. __________________ all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :) It is about Time Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late ! http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004 Last edited by CruNcher; 3rd September 2016 at 01:43.

3rd September 2016, 04:17	#1262 \| Link
NikosD Registered User Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Athens, Greece Posts: 2,901	Yes, but is the late Polaris VP9 decoder a fixed-fuction decoder like Maxwell's with 960 card which Nvidia enabled some time later than the initial release of 960 or a hybrid decoder ? Of course as long as Chrome official releases don't support VP9 HW decoder, all the other uses of VP9 are insignificant. Only Edge supports VP9 HW decoder. But the difference between a hybrid and a HW decoder is not insignificant. __________________ Win 10 x64 (19042.572) - Core i5-2400 - Radeon RX 470 (20.10.1) HEVC decoding benchmarks H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all

9th September 2016, 08:53	#1277 \| Link
Paul Tronc Registered User Join Date: Sep 2016 Posts: 34	My first test with GTX960 All right, My first tests using GTX 960 + HEVC + Madvr 32 + Lav Filter 32 + 1080p diffuser are very positive. That's simple, I could'nt find the decoding limit of my setup. I launched the http://jell.yfish.us/ 400mbps 4k uhd hevc 10bit video, I get a perfect rendering using my standard Madvr settings. The only limitation is the downscaling algorithm, it seems like I have to stay on bicubic. Any other algorithm will cause frame dropping. I suspect the jellyfish samples to be not fully representative of a high bitrate video, it looks too easy to be true. I tried another 2016p 60fps 50Mbps video, no problem : http://demo-uhd3d.com/fiche.php?cat=uhd&id=90 Next steps, I want to try : - DXVA checker benchmark - same tests on my 1440p display - adding frc (SVP) to get 60fps (I don't understand why SVP/avisynth don't see HEVC files, there must be a wrong setting somewhere) If you have another suggestion for a stronger stress test... Last edited by Paul Tronc; 9th September 2016 at 11:04.

6th September 2016, 10:57	#1265 \| Link
ashlar42 Registered User Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 656	What would currently be the most cost effective solution to build a Windows 10 based HTPC, with 4K and HEVC decoding capabilities? I ask here since you seem to be trying all combinations. Thank you.

6th September 2016, 14:39	#1266 \| Link
huhn Registered User Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 7,925	the cheapest card is the rx 460. for UHD presentation you should get a GPU with at least 3GB of vram.

7th September 2016, 15:47	#1268 \| Link
huhn Registered User Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 7,925	you should read the question. and the RC 460 is not the cheapest card that can decode HEVC?

7th September 2016, 16:25	#1270 \| Link
huhn Registered User Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 7,925	so card for double the money that can theoretically decode 12 bit which isn't even part of the DXVA spec is better?

8th September 2016, 08:19	#1273 \| Link
huhn Registered User Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 7,925	there is no commercial 12 bit content. even if they are adding it you are unlikely to really need it any time soon. the last CUVID "update" i know of was just a repack. CUVID has some serious issues on windows 10 on top. they have a lot todo maybe adding 10 bit is a start... the problem that only nvidia can do it in theory will slow this down too. commercial product will stay away from it for better compatibility.

8th September 2016, 12:04	#1275 \| Link
huhn Registered User Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 7,925	if you are going to use it to display UHD AT UHD resolution. you could run out of Vram. in term of madVR you are relatively lucky. you can lower the GPU queue. but deinterlanced content can't be deinterlanced by madVR like this and other issues can show up. with default madVR settings it will not work. i'm really regretting buying the 2G version of the 960. you are totally fine on a 1080p screen (i planned this card for a 1080p screen). just to make that clear.

9th September 2016, 20:27	#1279 \| Link
huhn Registered User Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 7,925	close i get ~59 FPS in decode mode.

10th September 2016, 11:00	#1280 \| Link
Paul Tronc Registered User Join Date: Sep 2016 Posts: 34	Netflix_TunnelFlag is not smooth on my 1440p display, I'll check later on my 1080p one. I tried with MPC HC 32, MPC-BE 64, PotPLayer 64, each time with Madvr. I'm currently encoding a 1080p BluRay to HEVC at 190fps, CPU usage 7% , GPU usage 6%, GPU temp 50°C with the fans off. Pretty impressive.