H.264 DXVA Benchmarks: QuickSync vs UVD 2.2 vs VP4 vs VP5

[huhn]

i do this later i got a ssd with over 500 mb read.

i may even downgrading to the old driver to double check but not sure this is a bit of work.

the file are at the moment on a nas which is pretty fast...

[huhn]

nothing changed the frist run is faster but i ignore the first run

http://s3.imgimg.de/uploads/nothingchangedae1782f0png.png

[TEB]

a slight offtopic question, but what windows player support 4k resolution source files together with QS/Dshow filter?

[NikosD]

Well I did manage to overclock Core i5-2400 GPU from 1100 MHz to 1450 MHz - 32% raise.

Also I managed to overclock memory from 1333MHz to 1373MHz with an increase to CPU from 3.1GHz to 3.2GHz.
After all these I ran dxva benchmarks of clips 2, 3 and 8 of my collection.

I used latest drivers and DXVA Checker 2.9.1 along with LAV 0.55.3 Native

Clips 2 and 3 didn't go up to expected performance, although of course they had an increase.

I analyzed the benchmarking procedure with Intel GPA 2013 R1 to find out that those 2 clips didn't fully utilize the MFX engine.
Also the combination of latest drivers, dxva checker and LAV video was slower than the one of the original benchmarks of my first page of benchmarks.

But clip 8 was a different story.
The performance went from 118fps to 159fps. Big improvement.

Intel GPA said that utilization of MFX engine was 99% for clip 8.

Now Eric with my overclocked GPU, I'm ready for 4K :)

@TEB
PotPlayer can play 4K in all modes (native, cb, CUDA, QS)

[huhn]

i'm back to the old driver with an clean windows at frist i was shock at the dxva performance 91 was the best i can get with the old driver even lower then the new one...

then i changed all media settings to application settings and it is now at 130 fps! even higher then before: http://s3.imgimg.de/uploads/duckstakeoff0f7bc83epng.png quicksync still crashes.


the first clip is even faster: about 875 http://s3.imgimg.de/uploads/dxva20c02e518png.png

it is not easy at all to test dxva performance...

sry about that but the nr. before are all to low...

[NikosD]

Interesting...

What are your settings to media settings in order to try them with my Core i5 ?

And if you install again the new driver with the fast media settings, maybe you will get faster results than the old one ?

[huhn]

the parts under color/image enhancement i set them all to application settings.

and i found that

Several optimizations to reduce the system power consumption have been added in this driver. These optimizations might result in minor performance drop in some games while yielding power savings. The user can choose to override these power optimizations by selecting the “Maximum Performance” power mode in Intel control panel or “High Performance” mode in the Windows power setting.

source: http://www.legitreviews.com/news/15354/

[NikosD]

I tried your settings and got a serious performance boost.
I have to ask Eric why Intel has default values that lower performance so much.

Of course, if you benchmark with DXVAChecker using EVR renderless, it doesn't matter what are your media settings.
It only matters when you are using EVR (as in real world playback)

Also, I managed to overclock GPU without doing anything special, just a BIOS setting and I pushed the clock to 2100MHz (from 1100 MHz max)

The result using LAV 0.56 and DXVAChecker 2.9.1+ fast media settings with clip 8 was a huge 220 fps.

Close to IvyBridge.

[wanezhiling]

By the way, WMP12 seems to be able to play back 4K files as well now. Not sure if it was able to do that before.
Its sw decoding, not hw decoding.

[NikosD]

Using MPC-HC 1.6.7.7114 x86 (@ EVR) + LAV Filters 0.57.0 x86 (@ DXVA2 native) + Windows 7 SP1 x64 + GIGABYTE GV-N520SL-1GI (http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4006#ov) (@ 320.18 WHQL) unfortunately does not play back the 2160p30 "Roast Duck (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1591912#post1591912)" clip for example smoothly.

Playback is slow and stuttery.


Downloading the file right now and I'm gonna test it with my a little slower GT 610 card (535MHz memory vs 600MHz memory)



AFAIK, 370 Mbps is out of spec for H.264 High Profile.

H.264 High Profile can only go up to 300 Mpbs @ Level 5.1/5.2 according to official H.264 specification AFAIK.



True, is out of spec.


It's exactly the same with MPC-HC.

EVR CP performance is worse than EVR performance.



Maybe the Koreans of PotPlayer can do a miracle :eek:


PS:

By the way, WMP12 seems to be able to play back 4K files as well now. Not sure if it was able to do that before.

True

[NikosD]

Its sw decoding, not hw decoding.

No, it's hardware decoding.

Microsoft's codecs both DS and MFT can decode 4K with VP5.

Probably true for Ivy, too. (I don't have one)

[NikosD]

[QUOTE=jq963152;1630141

Using MPC-HC 1.6.7.7114 x86 (@ EVR) + LAV Filters 0.57.0 x86 (@ DXVA2 native) + Windows 7 SP1 x64 + GIGABYTE GV-N520SL-1GI (http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4006#ov) (@ 320.18 WHQL) unfortunately does not play back the 2160p30 "Roast Duck (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1591912#post1591912)" clip for example smoothly.

Playback is slow and stuttery.

[/QUOTE]

I've already had that file called "Chimei-inn"

For reasons unknown to me, it is true that this 50Mbps file can put VP5 to 99% utilization, but I can play it almost flawlessly@30 fps with PotPlayer :p

If you benchmark it with DXVA Checher you will get an average of little more than 30fps like
26/30/33

If you play it with DXVA Checker you will also get a 26/28/30 and the same feeling I get with PotPlayer.

You can't possibly say that an average 28fps of a 30fps clip is slow and stuttered :confused:

[NikosD]

Well, I have about 40 4K clips - from 2048x1280 up to 4096x2304 - and from 15 fps up to 120 fps.

The great majority of them ~90% can be decoded from around 30fps to max ~42-45fps.

To check the power of VP5 try to google a version of "duck" file which is 3840x2160@30fps and of average bitrate of 243Mbps close to theoretical maximum of 300Mbps.
It's a 493MB file on HD.

If you benchmark it or play it with DXVA Checker you will get these figures - which for me are amazing:

25/28/30

The performance is not as fluid as it could, but it's more than good enough to watch the clip.

Most of the people here believe or have said that VP5 is almost useless for 4K decoding which is by FAR WRONG.

It is not created for low bitrate 4K clips - as almost everyone believes - but on the contrary it manages to play 243Mbps 3840x2160 clips up to 28 fps on average using EVR.

If you use it with EVR-CP, it is slow.
This is what I'm trying to say.

The way to benchmark DXVA performance of various codecs is described here at an old thread by me:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=156660

[NikosD]

As I 've written before GT520 = GT610 (GT610 is a rebranded GT520)
My card has 810MHz clock for GPU cores and 535 MHz = 1070 MHz DDR3 memory clock - little slower than yours.

For DXVA native playback/ benchmarking, we have actually the same card.

[NikosD]

I really can't follow you with your last post.

GT520 cards do exist with GF108 chip but are very rare variants.
GF108 is basically a GT440 card which has a VP4 video processor.

But, what all these have to do with our cards ?
It's a completely irrelevant statement.

We can both play in HW 4K H.264 clips, so we have both a GF119 GPU with a VP5 processor with the same performance.

What are you trying to prove and what are you looking for ?

Download a lot of different 4K clips, do some benchmarking with DXVA checker and check out your results.
Then, compare your own results with mine and come back posting your findings.

[NikosD]

Is it normal that the "GPU Usage:" indicator in DXVA Checker 2.9.1 is greyed out and doesn't show anything while benchmarking and playing back in DXVA Checker 2.9.1?


Same goes here.
ATI/AMD cards usually don't have such issues.
Probably for DXVA Checker developer is easier to correct bugs with ATI/AMD cards than Nvidia.
Or maybe it's an Nvidia driver's bug.


Also, is it normal that the "GPU Acceleration" menu entry is greyed out and not selectable for "[DS] LAV Video Decoder [DXVA2] [AVC1 3840x2160]" in DXVA Checker 2.9.1?

I think that is something that has to do with internal structure of LAV Video decoder.
Because MS DS/MFT codecs and others have no such issues.
But it doesn't stop you or bother you for anything regarding playing/ benchmarking with DXVA Checker.

Both of the above are not a problem for playing/ benchmarking clips with DXVA Checker.

My interest now is if you or someone else could check out VP5 performance using EVR-CP and VP5 performance using EVR renderer with a Kepler card (from GT640 and above - any GTX 600 series)

It would be interesting to see if there are any benefits for VP5 performance by using faster VRAM, wider memory bus and more GPU cores embedded of course in a different GPU architecture (Kepler)

[wanezhiling]

EVR-CP costs more performance than vanilla EVR on all graphics cards, its just normal.
The more modern and the more powerful your GPU is, the less increase (vanilla EVR --> EVR-CP).

[NikosD]

In general this is true.

I'm interested in performance numbers - a quantitative approach.

[NikosD]

Playback of 4K files with VP5 seems like playback of 1080p60 fps files with ATI cards.
It's doable but not perfect.

Use PotPlayer with internal DXVA filters and use EVR renderer - not the default EVR CP.

I have a 90% success of all my 4K files and 100% of all youtube downloaded 4K files with that little card.

I can even play 4K clips with <65% VPU utilization.

It's the best HTPC card I've ever had, fanless with a TDP of 29W.

The conversation ends here by me because we have same numbers but different impressions of those same numbers :D

[NikosD]

EVR-CP costs more performance than vanilla EVR on all graphics cards, its just normal.
The more modern and the more powerful your GPU is, the less increase (vanilla EVR --> EVR-CP).

The above statement is false.
At last I got a little time to check it in more detail and found out these:

1) VP4, UVD, UVD2.2 have no performance hit at all using EVR-CP instead of EVR with PotPlayer.

As a matter of fact using EVR-CP with UVD2.2 (Radeon 5750) had a better sense of fluid playback than EVR vanilla with 1080p60 clips

2) Only VP5 has a TREMENDOUS performance hit using the default EVR-CP renderer instead of EVR.

I only made the observation, I don't know the reason.

So, I have to repeat myself once more.

Use only EVR renderer with PotPlayer and VP5 for demanding playback situations (like 4K playback).

DO NOT USE the default EVR-CP renderer of PotPlayer with VP5.

I didn't check performance of MPC-HC with VP5 in any situation (EVR/ EVR-CP)

Maybe it's slower than PotPlayer with EVR and VP5, causing the stuttering mentioned above.

[NikosD]

A performance preview of Snapdragon 800 at Anandtech:


Along with the x2 performance of Adreno 330 vs Adreno 320 we have the first mobile SoC capable of 4K H.264 Hardware Encoding / Decoding (playback).

It is capable of Hardware encoding/decoding of H.264 3840x2160@25fps with 120Mbps bitrate available to smartphones and tablets :eek:

4K samples here 3840x2160@25fps-120Mbpshttp://images.anandtech.com/reviews/gadgets/qualcomm/MDP8974/VID_20130618_161251.renametomp4.zip (]http://anandtech.com/show/7082/snapdragon-800-msm8974-performance-preview-qualcomm-mobile-development-tablet[/URL)

and YouTube here 3840x2160@25fps-56Mbps[URL=]http://youtu.be/H2eoSEPIQPQ

I'm sure that Ivy and Haswell can play both of them easily, but I have to say that my tiny VP5 can play both of them too - with an almost zero CPU utilization of my poor Core2Duo ;)

[wanezhiling]

http://bluesky23.yu-nagi.com/en/DXVAChecker.html
DXVA Checker 3.0.0

[NikosD]

A lot of changes...Really nice app.

[NikosD]

For those interested, I did some tests regarding multiple streams decoding on various video hardware and various video formats.

The test platform was:

Win 8 x64
MPC-HC v1.6.8 (with internal codecs using DXVA native)

Video Processors (with latest drivers and default clocks)

UVD2.2 (Radeon 5750)
VP4 (Geforce 440GT)
VP5 (Geforce 610GT) and
QuickSync 1 (HD 2000 - SandyBridge)

The video formats were all 1080p (full HD 1920x1080 progressive):

WMV HD (a 1080p24fps@10Mbps clip - the toughest WMV3 clip I have)
VC-1 (a 1080p24fps@18Mbps clip - a medium to hard VC-1 clip)
MPEG-2 (a 1080p24fps@45Mbps clip - a hard MPEG-2 (.ts) clip)
H.264 (a 1080p24fps@11Mbps clip - a Main@L4.1 "normal" clip)

The results are below - very interesting in my opinion.

WMV3

UVD2.2 - 2 streams
VP4 - 3 streams ~89% VPU utilization
VP5 - 4 streams ~89~ VPU utilization
QuickSync - Not supported

VC-1

UVD2.2 - 2 streams
VP4 - 3 streams ~95% VPU utilization
VP5 - 4 streams ~95~ VPU utilization
QuickSync - Not supported

MPEG-2

UVD2.2 - Not supported
VP4 - 3 streams ~80% VPU utilization
VP5 - 5 streams ~92~ VPU utilization
QuickSync - >9 streams


H.264

UVD2.2 - 2 streams
VP4 - 3 streams ~88% VPU utilization
VP5 - 4 streams ~99~ VPU utilization
QuickSync - >9 streams

Comments:

1)
UVD2.2 supports only 2 streams for all formats - odd behavior (driver?).
VP4, VP5 are the only video processors supporting all of 4 formats
I stopped QuickSync multiple streams at 9, not because of frame dropping or performance reasons, but because of limited space in my one and only screen (21.5" - 1920x1080). I think that maybe 10 or 11 streams were doable.

2) It's a pity that so fast hardware like QuickSync supports only 2 formats (MPEG-2, H.264) in DXVA native mode even AFTER 3 GENERATIONS/ VERSIONS of QuickSync.
UVD3.0 supports 5 formats (MPEG-2, MPEG-4 ASP, H.264, VC-1, WMV3) and VP4, VP5 support 4 and a half - because MPEG-4 ASP is supported only in CUVID mode.

3)When trying to measure QuickSync VPU utilisation with Intel GPA monitor, I had major frame dropping with the window open in front. Only in minimized mode it worked well - strange.
From what I've seen, the major bottleneck was EU utilisation and not MFX utilisation.
Faster QuickSync versions with more EUs and faster clocks can go up to a lot more streams I believe.

[nevcairiel]

VC1 works on Intel if you use the QuickSync decoder from egur in LAV Video or ffdshow. You could also implement it with dxva native, just no one has done it, its not a hw limitation.

MPEG4 ASP works also in DXVA on Nvidia but not sure which decoder implements dxva mpeg4 anyway.

[NikosD]

I know that VC-1 works with QuickSync decoder of Eric, but QuickSync decoder is not DXVA native.
It's more like DXVA copy-back.

I think I made it clear in my description that I used DXVA native only.

If you know any DXVA decoder that works with Nvidia hardware, tell me and I'll try it.

I have found none.

Until then, MPEG-4 ASP is not supported by Nvidia hardware in DXVA mode.

[wanezhiling]

You could also implement it with dxva native, just no one has done it, its not a hw limitation.
Is it a technical problem? I really hope LAV could be the first one to implement Intel VC-1 DXVA.:)

[NikosD]

You could also implement it with dxva native, just no one has done it, its not a hw limitation.


Regarding to your answer in Intel Media SDK - Quick Sync Video thread on February 2013 which is here

@rtabrah
Eric Sardella once wrote a whitepaper how to properly use the (proprietary) ClearVideo H.264 interface back on the older Intel GPUs, which elaborated on the specific differences required to use it. Luckily SNB and IVB now implement the standard H.264 DXVA decoder, and its no longer required.
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/using-h264avc-directx-video-acceleration-with-the-intel-g45gm45-express-chipsets/

However, if the same kind of information present in this document could also be provided for VC-1, i would be happy to implement it for full Intel VC-1 DXVA2 support, which would be contributed back to ffmpeg for everyone to use.
I don't need a fancy document, i just need to know what to do. :)

there is no VC-1 DXVA2 documentation from Intel, but if there was, you would be very happy to implement it - according to your words ;)

Is it true ?
Is there documentation from Intel side to implement DXVA VC-1 and are you going to do it ?

[nevcairiel]

There is only documentation missing how to do it, but that doesn't mean its not possible. Could also try to reverse engineer from the Media SDK, but thats annoying work.
The Hardware supports it, its only software thats missing.

Even then, you don't need to manually implement it, you can use the Media SDK and use it as a native DXVA decoder. Someone just needs to do it.
I believe some of the commercial decoders implement it (most likely using the MSDK in exactly this way), Cyberlink or ArcSoft, i forgot which one, maybe both? Its a Blu-ray format, so they usually try to support it on new hardware.

[wanezhiling]

http://wccftech.com/amd-kaveri-apu-steamrollerb-core-features-20-cpu-30-gpu-performance-uplift-richland-platform-details-unveiled/

http://cdn2.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/AMD-Kaveri-APU-Platform-Details-635x476.png
UVD4.2 :eek:
So current GCN GPU(HD7xxx and R7/R9)'s UVD is 4.0 not 3.0?

[NikosD]

It looks like a typo.

I have seen it in all other places as UVD3.2.

[wanezhiling]

http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/DESKTOP/PROCESSORS/A-SERIES/Pages/a-series-apu.aspx#3

UVD3.2 was already introduced in Trinity APU.:p

[nevcairiel]

Since there isn't even a "NEW" in front of the UVD thing, it may still be a typo.

[littleD]

Why not 4.2. It's annouced that AMD R9 2x0 cards have improved UVD. I cant find that anybody would number it though. If we take in consideriation tighter componet placement on HSA chip, new VCE, then UVD on kaveri (2.0?) might get even higher number too.

Funny fact. I always considered AMD HW decode chips inferior to nvidia, especially in the times of lack of 5.1 level support. But now it's only AMD whos chips can hardware decode 10-bit h264 videos. Check this out all anime maniacs http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQ5NjU

[nevcairiel]

But now it's only AMD whos chips can hardware decode 10-bit h264 videos. Check this out all anime maniacs http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQ5NjU

There is no consumer hardware today that can properly decode 10-bit H.264.

All they did was hack the existing 8-bit decoder to simply decode 10-bit material. You can get a picture out of it that looks mostly correct, but it will exhibit occasional visible corruption, and it will never be 100% correct. There are other precedences for this happening on other hardware, so its nothing new.

Wrong decoding is worse then no decoding, IMHO.

[NikosD]

http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/DESKTOP/PROCESSORS/A-SERIES/Pages/a-series-apu.aspx#3

UVD3.2 was already introduced in Trinity APU.:p

I was definitely wrong, I thought we were talking about Richland.

Kaveri will have indeed a new decoding engine -UVD 4.2

The interesting thing is how much really "new" will be.

It won't have HEVC decoding in hardware, but let's hope it will have 4K H.264 decoding, at last.

I'm not sure about UVD 4.0, if has ever used in a GPU.

Wikipedia has stopped to UVD3 and I haven't found any other info.

[wanezhiling]

VLIW5/VLIW4 architecture
HD6000/1st Llano UVD3.0
2nd Trinity/Richland UVD3.2

GCN architecture
HD7000 UVD4.0?
3rd Kaveri UVD4.2

:p

[NikosD]

Another industry first for Qualcomm.

After the 4K H.264 hardware accelerated video in Snapdragon 800 - for smartphones and tablets - Qualcomm is the first company to bring HW accelerated H.265 content in new Snapdragon 805, available in 2014.

Details here:
http://anandtech.com/show/7537/qualcomms-snapdragon-805-25ghz-128bit-memory-interface-d3d11class-graphics-more

[NikosD]

Maxwell is out with a promise of Nvidia of HW assisted H.265 decoding (not full HW acceleration) in the near future.


It has a faster decoder VP6 (?) probably capable of 4K@60 fps.


Radeon 7750 once again fails to HW accelerate 4K clips and uses software decoding.


Read here:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7764/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-750-ti-and-gtx-750-review-maxwell/9

[NikosD]

I've installed latest iGPU drivers for my Pentium G3420 yesterday v.3412 and find out today two extraordinary things that I would never expect.

1) QuickSync transcoding - yes decoding and encoding - is available for the first time in a Pentium CPU (Haswell-DT core) !!

I tried it and it really works!

QuickSync encoding with Pentium G3420!

2) HEVC_VLD_Main appeared while enumerating DXVA device decoders !!

[qtwebkit]

Hi, I've just made a simple benchmark for recent popular decoders - LAV Video Decoder, MPC Video Decoder, Microsoft DTV-DVD Video Decoder and ArcSoft Video Decoder. I failed to test CyberLink Video Decoder in DXVA Checker, as it was high-lighted in DSF/MFT Viewer list and would not be checked when choosing a sample. Any one knows the reason?

Here's the result and screenshots (https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=C134CFE2F5253FB2%21214).

It seems MPC Video Decoder lead in most 720P Samples, while ArcSoft Video Decoder performance better in 1080P Samples.Sadlly I found LAV take more CPU usage than BE's standalone filter and ArcSoft Video Decoder in DXVA mode. As I was told the Microsoft Decoder is much more effecient in Windows 8, It's werid that it performanced the worst of all in my test.

I wonder if you have made such tests recently, since my result is far beyond my expectation, I wish you and Nev would take a look at the performance and give me some help:).

[NikosD]

Welcome to the club :)

It's been a really long long time since my last overall codecs test -with all available codecs tested.

I've settled down with LAV filters and feel lazy to test anything else!


I failed to test CyberLink Video Decoder in DXVA Checker, as it was high-lighted in DSF/MFT Viewer list and would not be checked when choosing a sample. Any one knows the reason?


IIRC there were specific CyberLink video decoder versions that could be used outside the app.

Maybe you could try to check the properties of that decoder and find out anything there that could possibly help.

Also, just in case, try the today's release of DXVA Checker v3.0.1


Sadlly I found LAV take more CPU usage than BE's standalone filter and ArcSoft Video Decoder in DXVA mode.


Only Nev could answer this.


As I was told the Microsoft Decoder is much more effecient in Windows 8, It's werid that it performanced the worst of all in my test.


I think Win 8.1 has even faster decoders, but I'm not sure if they are faster than LAV filters.

This is an easy test for me, since I have Win 8.1 Pro x64, so I'll test it tomorrow and see the performance difference.

For me the good thing is that free decoders are very close and sometimes faster than the best commercial ones.

This is a huge progress.

[nevcairiel]

LAV is optimized for smooth and fluid playback, not benchmarking. I could probably make it slightly faster in benchmarking, but past experience has shown that aggressive optimization to get 1% more performance in a benchmark can result in playback being no longer smooth on some systems - especially low powered ones.

[qtwebkit]

Due to hardware and other limitations, I could not make an overall comparison as yours. Actually, I've been making MPC-HC as my default player for months, and also, thanks to the superior LAV Filters.

IIRC there were specific CyberLink video decoder versions that could be used outside the app.

Maybe you could try to check the properties of that decoder and find out anything there that could possibly help.

Also, just in case, try the today's release of DXVA Checker v3.0.1

Yes, I got the CyberLink standalone filters from wanezhiling's sharing. But CyberLink appears the same as 3.0.0 in 3.0.1. Maybe I could ask him for help. Thanks you all the same!;)

I'll test it tomorrow and see the performance difference.

Waiting for your test.:)

[NikosD]

As I was told the Microsoft Decoder is much more effecient in Windows 8, It's werid that it performanced the worst of all in my test.

I wonder if you have made such tests recently, since my result is far beyond my expectation, I wish you and Nev would take a look at the performance and give me some help:).



I think Win 8.1 has even faster decoders, but I'm not sure if they are faster than LAV filters.

This is an easy test for me, since I have Win 8.1 Pro x64, so I'll test it tomorrow and see the performance difference.



I could probably make it slightly faster in benchmarking, but past experience has shown that aggressive optimization to get 1% more performance in a benchmark can result in playback being no longer smooth on some systems - especially low powered ones.

Well, I was wrong, has been a really long time since my last non LAV video tests.

MS DS and MS MFT decoders of Windows 8.1 are a lot faster than LAV video in both 1080p and 4K H.264 clips

To be more exact MS DS is the faster one, followed by MS MFT.

The performance advantage of MS DS is about 15% (10% to 20%) over LAV Video latest nightly !

P.S

@qtwebkit

I've just seen your screenshots and I have to say that you must never stay to one run, one test.
You must run at least three to five times each test and try to find out the average, skipping the first test, which almost always is not accurate.

[qtwebkit]

LAV is optimized for smooth and fluid playback, not benchmarking.

Clear now:). I was missleaded by the "performance" and "speed". Thanks for all you have done to provide us the great freeware!

BTW, are there any specific optimization for Windows 8 in recent nightly codes?

[qtwebkit]

MS DS and MS MFT decoders of Windows 8.1 are a lot faster than LAV video in both 1080p and 4K H.264 clips

To be more exact MS DS is the faster one, followed by MS MFT.

I've once got the similiar result, but not this time. In fact, I have tried MS DS and MS MFT for more than 5 times but merely with no difference.

It seems there's something wrong with my MS Decoder, just as CyberLink, high-lighted red in DSF/MFT Viewer. Maybe it's the problem of my Windows 8 LITE. So I would change to another environment and try again.

BTW, have you test the latest MPC Video Decoder(MPC-BE), which I would like to know your result either.:D

[nevcairiel]

MS DS and MS MFT decoders of Windows 8.1 are a lot faster than LAV video in both 1080p and 4K H.264 clips

Are you talking about DXVA or Software?

I just tested LAV Video vs MS DirectShow in DXVA, and the performance is about the same on my Haswell, and on high-bitrate clips LAV was even slightly faster (ie. on high-bitrate Birds in 4K, 180 fps LAV at 3-4% CPU vs. 160 fps MS at 7-8% CPU)
All tests on Windows 8.1 on a HD4600 with DXVAChecker 3.0.1, LAV in DXVA2-Native mode of course.

[qtwebkit]

@nevcairiel
I was puzzled by my test result, which 8bit+i420+720P consume more cpu than 8bit+i420+1080P. I know litte about it, could you explain it briefly? THX!

[NikosD]

Are you talking about DXVA or Software?


@nev

@qtwebkit

Well,

in order to have comparable results I will tell you what I did:
I tested on my signature system various clips in DXVA native.
As a matter of fact, I don't know any way to put MS DS or MS MFT in DXVA copy-back mode.


I just tested LAV Video vs MS DirectShow in DXVA, and the performance is about the same on my Haswell, and on high-bitrate clips LAV was even slightly faster (ie. on high-bitrate Birds in 4K, 180 fps LAV at 3-4% CPU vs. 160 fps MS at 7-8% CPU)
All tests on Windows 8.1 on a HD4600 with DXVAChecker 3.0.1, LAV in DXVA2-Native mode of course.

Using DXVAChecker v3.0.1, I used as benchmark clips two of my 1080p video posted in the first page.

I chose No5 (5.Cat-1080p60fpsRef4-25Mbps) and No7 (7.Vortexx_1088p24fpsRef3-109Mpbs) because both clips can be tested with all three codecs (LAV, MS DS and MS MFT).
The .mkv clips can't be tested without an MKV MFT splitter.

So, for clip No5 - high frame-rate, medium bandwidth (Lav latest nightly build)

LAV Avg: 410fps

MS DS: Avg: 440fps

For clip No7 - low frame-rate, huge bandwidth

LAV Avg: 210fps

MS DS Avg: 250fps

I hope it's clear now.

Waiting for your HD4000 and HD4600 results.

One last important thing.

You have to disable every VPP function in control panel, even the hidden ones like VIDEO - > color enhancement, VIDEO -> Image enhancement, VIDEO -> Image scaling

You have to toggle everything to "Application settings" and "OFF"