madVR - high quality video renderer (GPU assisted)

[6ari8]

That sounds quite interesting. I don't really have an explanation for that, unfortunately. Looking at my code, I seem to be doing everything correctly. Also on my PC I can't reproduce these issues. As a test I've setup GPU queues to 16 and the present queue to 8, and playback is mooth with D3D11 in both windowed and FSE mode, regardless of whether the OSD is on or off.

It seems there are some odd problems out there atm, with v0.88.17+, but it seems to affect only few users, and every of them seems to have different problems, and I can't reproduce any of them. So it's really hard for me to do anything about it. Of course I could simply revert all changes I did, but then we would lose some important improvements that several media player devs have been wishing for and been quite happy to see introduced in v0.88.17 (like low latency OSD, smooth and low GPU power paused mode rendering etc).

I believe the stuttering issue started with v0.88.16b.

Maybe you can ask users who're having similar issues to try and see if they don't happen in debug mode. If the debug mode has the same code as release mode then it really is strange.

Maybe I can try and help you reproduce it.
*enable FSE mode and use D3D11
*Set both CPU queue size and GPU queue size to 10
*Set "how many video frames shall be presented in advance:" in exclusive mode settings to 2
*All trade quality for performance options are disabled.
*Set your monitor/TV to 23Hz
*Download this file: http://usersfiles.com/ltuz45pmu6wz and play it while you have the OSD up.


Also, regarding v0.88.20, the issue is not fixed unfortunately.
It also introduced this issue

@madshi

Can you take a look at rendering stats with Kodi DSPlayer? Upscaled videos (720p -> 1080p) are reporting rendering stats of 1-2ms. This is with v0.88.20.

For anyone interested in giving Kodi DSPlayer a try, a build of Kodi v15 Final is now available.

DSPlayer Download Link: http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=223175

Detailed set-up guide in my signature.

Also reporting unrealistically low rendering stats in 88.20.

[ryrynz]

With regards to what Nev said over on the LAV thread

With madVR, using Copy-Back may give you slightly better quality, as madVR has a few problems getting access to the unprocessed image otherwise.

Can you give us any firm info on this?

[aufkrawall]

Where's the ground truth for this image? Do you *want* our discussion to not be objective? The problem with not having a ground truth is that we can discuss for hours how the upscaled image should look like without ever coming to an agreement.

I don't have any for this example, then let's skip it.


Maybe your very tiny original image was downscaled with a very soft algorithm?

As I said, the foreground looks totally clear to me in its native resolution.
Why is this not a valid point, according to you?


But artificially sharpening video is not something that should ever be enabled by default in madVR.

And you are missing my point. I never claimed that I would want to achieve artifical sharpness.
Is your display still sub-1080p? I really doubt it makes sense to judge about sharpness if you can count every single pixel.
When upscaling to WQHD, the blur becomes very intrusive when watching from the near. This is not the case when watching 1080p on the same display without scaling, no matter how close I get. So I must be bothered by the blur that emerges with scaling.

Sorry, two years ago I was still on 1280x1024 and felt perfectly happy with it.
Funny thing is that now for me everything looks blurry on it, there is no such thing as "natural sharpness". Instead, it's extremely easy to see any kind of artifacts though.

Probably someone with a 4k display <30" will even judge more in my way since WQHD is still a joke compared to mobile devices.


On the other hand, faithfully upscaling sources, by producing images which are as near to the ground truth as possible, that is something that would make a great default setting in madVR.

Of course this should be the goal, but then you'd also need to make NNEDI3 64 the default settings because everything else introduces tons of artifacts.


But please have a look at all the lines in these images. Take a step back from your monitor and compare the SuperRes image with the original frame, and with the AdaptiveSharpen image. Here's an extract using super-xbr for upscaling:

I already stated that NNEDI3 produces softer lines than super-xbr (at least super-xbr 100, difference is extreme). I wouldn't recommend any sharpening at all when upscaling without NNEDI3 because nobody needs sharpen of obvious artifacts.
I don't think it makes sense to discuss about your examples without knowing the exact super-xbr and AS settings.
Is it super-xbr 75? Then you have a point. Else not, there is not a real difference in line thickness when comparing 720p -> WQHD NNEDI3 64 + 0.2 AS UR vs. super-xbr 100 no UR.

[daert]

I have a problem with MPC-BE and madvr. If I set "treat 25p as 24p" in madvr, display mode won't change to 24p when I open a 25p video: it's stuck at 60p. If I use MPC-HC the issue doesn't appear. I'm using MPC-BE 1.4.5.579 and madvr 0.88.20

[Akeno]

I have a problem with MPC-BE and madvr. If I set "treat 25p as 24p" in madvr, display mode won't change to 24p when I open a 25p video: it's stuck at 60p. If I use MPC-HC the issue doesn't appear. I'm using MPC-BE 1.4.5.579 and madvr 0.88.20

That option requires ReClock to speed down the video first. Make sure the PAL speed down option is checked in the ReClock config.

[daert]

Indeed. PAL speed down is already enabled. In fact, everything is fine with MPC-HC

[leeperry]

Here's one of the images that I was testing with which seemed to show aliasing quite well:
Source (http://abload.de/img/mononoke-source0lo7u.png)
Downscaled (http://abload.de/img/mononoke-ll1er51.png)
I'm not really happy with how that looks using any of the sharpening options, or scaling other than NNEDI3.
Homogeneous black outlines really chew NNEDI3's work, it's indeed a strong contender for anime.

No, it's got nothing to do with dithering.
I did mean sharpening, I blame the crazy heat :p

Yes, might be an interesting test.
Righty, took me a while to find the ideal picture but I think this one works very nicely:

original untouched 1080p BD screenshot(not captured by me): http://thumbnails113.imagebam.com/42360/c13a97423597905.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/c13a97423597905)

downscaled to 960*540 in mVR .15 using CR AR LL and monostatic ED2@8bit: http://thumbnails114.imagebam.com/42360/a0577b423597909.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/a0577b423597909)


in mVR .15:
the untouched 1080p BD capture played in mVR using monostatic ED2@8bit, that's our "ground truth": http://thumbnails114.imagebam.com/42360/5df1e0423599515.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/5df1e0423599515)

sxbr75+SR3@0.41LQ(my favorite) http://thumbnails114.imagebam.com/42360/8ce3a9423599512.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/8ce3a9423599512)

sxbr75+SR3@0.41HQ http://thumbnails113.imagebam.com/42360/c70dc8423599509.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/c70dc8423599509)

NEDI+SR3@0.41LQ http://thumbnails114.imagebam.com/42360/0c1f95423599518.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/0c1f95423599518)

sxbr75+AS0.5 http://thumbnails114.imagebam.com/42360/afe133423599506.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/afe133423599506)

NNEDI3 for luma+chroma@16 neurons +SR3@0.41LQ http://thumbnails113.imagebam.com/42360/4f5943423599498.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/4f5943423599498)

NNEDI3 for luma@32 neurons+J3AR chroma+SR3@0.41LQ http://thumbnails113.imagebam.com/42360/38529c423599520.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/38529c423599520)

NNEDI3 for luma+chroma@32 neurons http://thumbnails105.imagebam.com/42360/8ad7dc423599504.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/8ad7dc423599504)


in mVR .20:

sxbr75+SR1@0.66LQ http://thumbnails114.imagebam.com/42361/34f4cf423600518.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/34f4cf423600518)

sxbr75+SR1@0.66HQ http://thumbnails113.imagebam.com/42361/14a19f423600511.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/14a19f423600511)

sxbr75+SR2@0.66HQ http://thumbnails113.imagebam.com/42361/5eb40d423600523.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/5eb40d423600523)

sxbr75+SR3@0.66HQ http://thumbnails114.imagebam.com/42361/89d95c423600530.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/89d95c423600530)

All the pics as a big zip file (https://mega.nz/#!3sQiARrI!23Ng1qM1F3HpJQxDmZKyarWTnLQojHgUTTKcAY--MHk).

I'm literally tired of all that pixel peeping so I might be completely wrong for all I know but I did run rather extensive comparisons on real world 25p material beforehand and this screenshots galore pretty much confirms all my impressions:

-I believe the blur I'm seeing with HQ Vs LQ SR is very obvious and I don't see how HQ could remotely be considered any closer to the original file :confused:
-sxbr75 is very nice, I wish one day I could try 70 or 80 http://forum-images.hardware.fr/images/perso/zigg.gif
-NEDI got superseded by sxbr75 as it would appear
-my favorite one remains sxbr75+SR3@0.41LQ in mVR .15, now that I see those screenshots some very slight AS on top might be a good idea so I will have to give it a try next time
-screenshots are nice and all but the magic SR does on motion blur makes it look far more natural to me(especially 24/25p) so I'm still very keen on sticking to .15 with 3@0.41LQ if that's my only option
I would gladly(and more than likely willhttp://forum-images.hardware.fr/images/perso/1/oh-la-vache-eh.gif) be proven wrong and I'm here to learn so shoot me now if you must, kthx http://forum-images.hardware.fr/images/perso/osweat.gif

[Akeno]

leeperry, taking a look at your examples, I'm still under the impression that HQ is closer to the groundtruth than LQ. While LQ gives a nice impression of the shadows underneath the roof tiles, it thickens the lines everywhere else too much. There's also some strange artifacts around the windows of the closer house. The small black chunks seem to be present in every example you post but LQ turns them into definitive lines.

[har3inger]

With regards to what Nev said over on the LAV thread



Can you give us any firm info on this?

This may be GPU/driver specific. The only way to test for yourself is to take two screenshots of the same frame, one with DXVA2 native, one without, and subtract them from each other in photoshop or something.

On my setup, if you compare DXVA2 native and DXVA2-cb, there are definite differences if you subtract the screenshots from each other that are greater than the difference you get from the different dithering pattern. All of these differences are barely visible, as they are under 5/255 luminosity in their intensity.

I'm on an ATI HD 8870 (R9 M270X) paired to an intel HD4000. Catalyst 15.6 beta

[strangeluck]

Also reporting unrealistically low rendering stats in 88.20.

Same here using MPC-HC. Render times are off by a minimum of 20-30ms. I have never had problems with render time display until the most recent round of updates. It seems to give accurate results when playing video on my primary display with the secondary monitor (a 1080p Samsung television) disabled. Playing video on the secondary display always shows render times of 5ms or less which is just entirely incorrect.

[aufkrawall]

Thanks for that sample, leeperry.
I'm seeing too much aliasing with SuperRes at the balcony railing, even with strength 1 and radius 1.0.
Even NNEDI3 64 doesn't look exactly great here, 256 neurons really improve the image a lot. However, 64 neurons are much more reasonable and still look better than super-xbr (e.g. regarding the antennas).
AS 0.2 UR still makes the image a little sharper without really destroying anything with NNEDI3 64. That's exactly what I meant with "set & forget".

I scaled it to 1080p and compared it with the original, madshi. :D

[Thunderbolt8]

Im wondering in how far it makes sense to compare different upscaling/downscaling algorythms when the comparison pic has been downscaled/upscaled before. couldnt there be potential interference from the downscaling/upscaling process which has been done before the upscaling/downscaling process? perhaps the outcome would be different in some cases if the first step wasnt done?

so doesnt it make more sense to look at a picture which has only either been upscaled or downscaled and not both?

[Akeno]

so doesnt it make more sense to look at a picture which has only either been upscaled or downscaled and not both?

If we do that, we get back into subjectivity. What looks best to one will differ from person to person and that is a conversation that won't reach a definitive conclusion.

[ryrynz]

This may be GPU/driver specific. The only way to test for yourself is to take two screenshots of the same frame, one with DXVA2 native, one without, and subtract them from each other in photoshop or something.

Tested on my Intel HD 4000 with both madVR and MPDN and there's no difference.

[JarrettH]

Love the comparisons. I guess I'll hold out until I can run SuperRes on top of super-xbr doubling :P

[ryrynz]

This may be GPU/driver specific. The only way to test for yourself is to take two screenshots of the same frame, one with DXVA2 native, one without, and subtract them from each other in photoshop or something.

On my setup, if you compare DXVA2 native and DXVA2-cb, there are definite differences if you subtract the screenshots from each other that are greater than the difference you get from the different dithering pattern. All of these differences are barely visible, as they are under 5/255 luminosity in their intensity.

I'm on an ATI HD 8870 (R9 M270X) paired to an intel HD4000. Catalyst 15.6 beta


Tested on my Intel HD 4000 with both madVR and MPDN and there's no difference.

Madshi, looks like there's an issue here. On my 750 Ti there are considerable differences between running LAV in copy-back mode and native DXVA2.

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/136044

[nevcairiel]

Madshi, looks like there's an issue here. On my 750 Ti there are considerable differences between running LAV in copy-back mode and native DXVA2.

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/136044

Its a known issue, one that cannot be fixed properly (ie. without copy-back), which is why you should use copy-back.
madVR used to have its own copy-back function, but it was removed because LAV is just more efficient at it.

It seems to mostly affect NVIDIA, which is the good news, since copy-back is very efficient on nvidia anyway.

[ryrynz]

Its a known issue, one that cannot be fixed properly (ie. without copy-back), which is why you should use copy-back.
madVR used to have its own copy-back function, but it was removed because LAV is just more efficient at it.

It seems to mostly affect NVIDIA, which is the good news, since copy-back is very efficient on nvidia anyway.

Thanks, wish I had known this earlier. Not sure why this has really only been made apparent now, it's something that should be in the OP IMO considering the quality difference.

[nevcairiel]

Thanks, wish I had known this earlier. Not sure why this has really only been made apparent now, it's something that should be in the OP IMO considering the quality difference.

Before evaluating the quality, you should also make sure that all trade quality options are off that interact with DXVA in any way. I don't think its usually *that* bad, but maybe I remembered wrong.

[ryrynz]

Before evaluating the quality, you should also make sure that all trade quality options are off that interact with DXVA in any way. I don't think its usually *that* bad, but maybe I remembered wrong.

All are unticked.

[chros]

Its a known issue, one that cannot be fixed properly (ie. without copy-back), which is why you should use copy-back.
madVR used to have its own copy-back function, but it was removed because LAV is just more efficient at it.

It seems to mostly affect NVIDIA, which is the good news, since copy-back is very efficient on nvidia anyway.
Thanks for the explanation!
Those test was done using DXVA native and copyback. What about CUVID? (I've been still using it for a long time.)

[huhn]

CUVID is just the room heating version of copyback.

[ryrynz]

Yeah I was wondering today when eventually it'll be removed.

[Thunderbolt8]

If we do that, we get back into subjectivity.why, in how far is judging this different than judging it from an image which has been up- and downscaled? how can you only be sure the result you see is from the algorythm you want to look at and has not been influenced by the other one?

[leeperry]

I'm still under the impression that HQ is closer to the ground truth than LQ.
Fair enough, I'm sure madshi will explain me how wrong I am using 500% magnified close-ups but at the end of the day I kinda rest my case that SR is in dire need of at least 3 separate knobs for number of passes, strength and LQ/HQ.

256 neurons really improve the image a lot. However, 64 neurons are much more reasonable and still look better than super-xbr (e.g. regarding the antennas).
I meant to try 256 neurons NNEDI3 for chroma+luma but mVR .20 was refusing to scale the picture to 1080p for some reason, I seriously wish all this upscaling madness could be used on still pictures too coz it's either a black frames feast or a total refusal to show anything. All picture viewers provide craptastic upscaling algorithms.

Oh BTW I had a gamut mapping PS script engaged in PotP so yeah the ground truth is the one I labelled as is and not the untouched capture.

[aufkrawall]

I meant to try 256 neurons NNEDI3 for chroma+luma but mVR .20 was refusing to scale the picture to 1080p for some reason
Any idea why? I had doubling activated for >= factor 1.5 (default) and it worked just normally.

Btw: Is it technically possible to just sharpen chroma to fight blur of CSS?

[Ver Greeneyes]

I seriously wish all this upscaling madness could be used on still pictures too coz it's either a black frames feast or a total refusal to show anything.I've had success loading images in MPC-HC, though it's not ideal for saving the result since I think madVR uses slightly different logic for that. I'm pretty sure the upscaling works just fine though.

[digitech]

Its a known issue, one that cannot be fixed properly (ie. without copy-back), which is why you should use copy-back.
madVR used to have its own copy-back function, but it was removed because LAV is just more efficient at it.

It seems to mostly affect NVIDIA, which is the good news, since copy-back is very efficient on nvidia anyway.

Which do you think is more efficcient? Im on nvidia 760 and still using Cuvid in Lav Filters, is copy back a better alternative?

[aufkrawall]

It should be in no way inferior. You probably even save energy with mpeg4-asp when NOT using Cuvid and instead software.
nevcairiel has no control over Cuvid since it's a blackbox, the DXVA2cb implementation is by himself.

[Akeno]

why, in how far is judging this different than judging it from an image which has been up- and downscaled? how can you only be sure the result you see is from the algorythm you want to look at and has not been influenced by the other one?

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here. The nature of scaling involves throwing away details when downscaling and preserving what details still exist when upscaling. Unless you had an analog source captured at two different optical zoom levels, this is the best we can do. Most digital sources we receive are going to be upscaled or downscaled using algorithms.

[Ver Greeneyes]

I do think the question of "which algorithm do studios/encoders most likely use to downscale footage" is an interesting question, since it will affect the look of what we're scaling and the usually unknown ground truth that we're trying to reach. I don't think it's likely to be Catmull-Rom LL AR if only because of madshi's anti-ringing algorithm - I'd imagine it would be either some form of Bicubic or Lanczos - or if they were going for a softer look maybe even Bilinear. Unfortunately that adds another variable to testing, and in the end you're just guessing.

[Thunderbolt8]

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here. The nature of scaling involves throwing away details when downscaling and preserving what details still exist when upscaling. Unless you had an analog source captured at two different optical zoom levels, this is the best we can do. Most digital sources we receive are going to be upscaled or downscaled using algorithms.when watching a movie on a screen of a different size, there will also only be one instance of scaling, either downscaling or upscaling. so I wonder why we dont do the comparisons that way as well. instead we use the other scaling method as well which might just influence the scaling method we want to judge in some way.

[bozokaydin]

In my home i am watching almost 1080p high quality rip movies on 1080p 80 inch Tv. What is your suggestions for this watching type? I am not using image upcaling, downscaling and image doubling.i have core i7 cpu and gtx 690

[har3inger]

Turn off every trade quality for performance tick box.

Pick something nice for chroma up scaling (nnedi3 is popular, but will make fan noise because it costs a lot)

Use one of the error diffusion dithering methods, or ordered dithering if fans are too loud.

Use smooth motion.

Set up the 3D lut for your display of you have the means to.

Play around with debanding and the source sharpener filters as you see fit.

Make sure you don't get dropped frames by checking stats with ctrl j

Enjoy.

[bozokaydin]

Turn off every trade quality for performance tick box.

Pick something nice for chroma up scaling (nnedi3 is popular, but will make fan noise because it costs a lot)

Use one of the error diffusion dithering methods, or ordered dithering if fans are too loud.

Use smooth motion.

Set up the 3D lut for your display of you have the means to.

Play around with debanding and the source sharpener filters as you see fit.

Make sure you don't get dropped frames by checking stats with ctrl j

Enjoy.

Thank you. For Nnedi3 64 neurons chroma upsampling do i ihave to activate superres filter? Do you suggest me to use Madvr image enchantment sharpening?

[Warner306]

In my home i am watching almost 1080p high quality rip movies on 1080p 80 inch Tv. What is your suggestions for this watching type? I am not using image upcaling, downscaling and image doubling.i have core i7 cpu and gtx 690

These are my settings. If you have a good GPU, substituting NNEDI3 for super-xbr would make sense. A first step would be test for your display's compatibility with 10-bit output. There is a thread dedicated to this in the software forum. Based on the resolution of your display, it is most likely an 8-bit panel, but it is worth exploring, as this is a component of picture quality.

Profile: "1080p"

Chroma: super-xbr150 + AR
Image: Jinc3 + AR
Luma Doubling: Off
Upscaling Refinement: Off
Artifact Removal - Debanding: Medium/High
Image Enhancements: FineSharp (strength: 0.5)
Dithering: Error Diffusion 2


Use of Image Enhancements are completely up to personal taste as any additional sharpening can look artificial to many people. I have embraced sharpening mostly because I am trying to stay current with the latest madVR features. I'm not totally sold on the look, however.

I would stay away from the SuperRes chroma filter. It is not nearly as useful as SuperRes when used from Upscaling Refinement.

[Warner306]

Now that Kodi DSPlayer has integrated low latency mode, I have noticed a new issue. I believe this addition has made 1080p60 playback a little stuttery with some noticeable blurring on moving objects. It is subtle, but I cannot detect the same problem at 1080p24.

I have switched between MPC-BE and DSPlayer at 60hz and find DSPlayer is now less smooth - the blurring on objects being particularly noticeable.

Was 3/2 pulldown properly tested when low latency mode was added? Something does not look right at 1080p60 when played through DSPlayer.

[bozokaydin]

These are my settings. If you have a good GPU, substituting NNEDI3 for super-xbr would make sense. A first step would be test for your display's compatibility with 10-bit output. There is a thread dedicated to this in the software forum. Based on the resolution of your display, it is most likely an 8-bit panel, but it is worth exploring, as this is a component of picture quality.

Profile: "1080p"

Chroma: super-xbr150 + AR
Image: Jinc3 + AR
Luma Doubling: Off
Upscaling Refinement: Off
Artifact Removal - Debanding: Medium/High
Image Enhancements: FineSharp (strength: 0.5)
Dithering: Error Diffusion 2


Use of Image Enhancements are completely up to personal taste as any additional sharpening can look artificial to many people. I have embraced sharpening mostly because I am trying to stay current with the latest madVR features. I'm not totally sold on the look, however.

I would stay away from the SuperRes chroma filter. It is not nearly as useful as SuperRes when used from Upscaling Refinement.

Yes my display is 8 bit. I am very pleased with the settings you offer for 1080p Bluray content. Thank you.

[har3inger]

Thank you. For Nnedi3 64 neurons chroma upsampling do i ihave to activate superres filter? Do you suggest me to use Madvr image enchantment sharpening?

You probably shouldn't activate the superres filter until it is developed a little more. In its current form it's not so good. nnedi3 64 neurons is also quite overkill for chroma upscaling, but since you have the GTX 690 to run it, may as well if the fan noise is tolerable.

SuperXBR is being actively developed like Warner mentions, and is a very cheap alternative to nnedi3 that still looks almost as good. Many people here would probably say that it's 2nd place for the best quality upscaler. You can play with the sharpness of that algorithm a bit as well. I find 150 can cause reds to pop unnaturally in a scene and use 100 instead, but it's basically whatever you think looks best. Sharper is noticeably better for animated content.

You can try out all the image enhancements for yourself easily by pausing a video, then turning on/off the settings to see what they do. It's all personal preference, so you need to see for yourself and come up with a combo that you find pleasing.

As a very general overview:

Finesharp enhances details and artifacts in the source. It can look good with exceptionally clean sources, but has a tendency to bring out ringing, blocking, and other artifacts (which are inevitable with almost all formats of compressed video with sane bitrates).

Lumasharpen is similar to what some games use for edge sharpening. It's a different look compared to finesharp. You might like it, you might not.

Adaptive sharpen tries to sharpen details more than artifacts in the source. In practice, it introduces some artifacts of its own sometimes. Again, try it yourself to see if it improves the image in your opinion.

Personally I use none of these and prefer a "purist" approach where I try to reproduce an image accurately instead of favoring heavy processing like sharpen filters.

[Akeno]

when watching a movie on a screen of a different size, there will also only be one instance of scaling, either downscaling or upscaling. so I wonder why we dont do the comparisons that way as well. instead we use the other scaling method as well which might just influence the scaling method we want to judge in some way.

Again, I'm not sure what you're getting at. We are trying to achieve scaling that is closest to the image we have designated as groundtruth. The grountruth is what the image should look like after upscaling. We need to scale down the groundtruth in this case to produce an image that we will scale back up to approach the groundtruth unless you have a source that is identical except for size differences. If I'm wrong in assuming what you're saying, please feel free to help clarify.

[avinab]

In build 88.20 when i am selecting NNEDI3 in chroma upscaling,it is showing JINC in OSD.Previously If i select NNEDI3 in chroma or image doubling MADVR crashes,but now its not crashing but shows JINC in OSD instead of NNEDI3.But it shows super-xbr,NEDI when i select those.I am on windows 10 build 10240.Nvidia driver 353.53 Geforce GTX 980.

[michkrol]

I'll assume NNEDI3 has never worked for you on (this installation of) Windows 10.
You are probably missing OpenCL, so I'd recommend installing drivers directly from nvidia's website.
The newest I could find is a hotfix: https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/853781/geforce-drivers/announcing-geforce-hotfix-driver-353-49-released-7-8-15-/

[Gravitator]

All kind people hello!
Version 0.88.16 during pause 0% GPU (MPC-HC 1.7.9.54);
Version 0.88.20 when paused consumes 40% of the GPU. - Перемудрил Мад;
(Win x64, Pentium E6600, nVidia GTX750 (DR 350.12).

[nevcairiel]

All kind people hello!
Version 0.88.16 during pause 0% GPU (MPC-HC 1.7.9.54);
Version 0.88.20 when paused consumes 40% of the GPU. - Перемудрил Мад;
(Win x64, Pentium E6600, nVidia GTX750 (DR 350.12).

Thats expected, madVR now keeps drawing the frame while paused.

[sneaker_ger]

But 40%? Shouldn't only presenting be done while pausing (+maybe OSD changes), no scaling/filtering?

[nevcairiel]

But 40%? Shouldn't only presenting be done while pausing (+maybe OSD changes), no scaling/filtering?

40% is a relative value, so without knowing the power state of the card, its not that meaningful.
It may have clocked down and show a high utilization.

But ultimately madshi will have to comment on what it really does in pause mode.

[avinab]

I'll assume NNEDI3 has never worked for you on (this installation of) Windows 10.
You are probably missing OpenCL, so I'd recommend installing drivers directly from nvidia's website.
The newest I could find is a hotfix: https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/853781/geforce-drivers/announcing-geforce-hotfix-driver-353-49-released-7-8-15-/


The nvidia site has 353.30 version as latest build.I was on that version.Same problem was happening.But yesterday i got a new display driver update from windows update.now the version is 353.50.But same problem still exists.

[SecurityBunny]

Just out of curiosity, what is everyone currently using for debanding strength and dithering mode?

[Vyral]

@SecurityBunny

No debanding.

Error Diffusion 1 opt1+2 for 1080p ;
Ordered Dithering opt2 for other sources.

[Thunderbolt8]

Again, I'm not sure what you're getting at. We are trying to achieve scaling that is closest to the image we have designated as groundtruth. The grountruth is what the image should look like after upscaling. We need to scale down the groundtruth in this case to produce an image that we will scale back up to approach the groundtruth unless you have a source that is identical except for size differences. If I'm wrong in assuming what you're saying, please feel free to help clarify.my point is when watching a movie which needs to be upscaled it will not be downscaled first then. only upscaled. so the upscaled picture should be compared to the source image to clarify which algorythm comes closest to the source at this resolution. because thats simply the resolution this movie will be watched and not at the same resolution as the source image.

my point is that I am questioning this method of sclaling into the other direction first and then getting back to the original size of the image, because we dont know in how far the result of the first scaling process might influence the result of the 2nd one, the one we want to look at. you wouldnt have this problem when directly applying the scaling process you want and compare from there.