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. |
27th November 2017, 12:02 | #47362 | Link | |||||||||
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In any case, I think the vote is very clear (see above), and it matches my own opinion. So NNEDI3 will be removed from the next build. I'll first remove just the options, but leave the code there, just in case definite proof comes up that it's still needed, after all. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.madshi.net/clown.png http://www.madshi.net/small.png Told you you'd love it! Because we're not photo editors who get RAW out of our cameras. We're getting highly compressed videos from the studios. Are you sure that double high + double medium is faster for you than direct quad high? That seems surprising to me. |
|||||||||
27th November 2017, 12:11 | #47364 | Link |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
I used shinchiro's 2017-11-19 64bit build with "profile=gpu-hq". I didn't specify which backend to use. I trusted in mpv auto-picking the best option automatically. Bad idea? If D3D11 or Vulkan are better, why are they not the default backend/api?
|
27th November 2017, 12:23 | #47365 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 116
|
Vulkan doesn't work on old GPUs and the d3d11 renderer is not documented.
Igv released FSRCNNX_x2_r1_16-0-4-3.glsl that is quite faster too. To get proper benchmark with vulkan, use this: https://haasn.xyz/posts/2017-10-05-h...hroughput.html Last edited by foozoor; 27th November 2017 at 13:06. |
27th November 2017, 12:50 | #47366 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 4,407
|
Quote:
However, a medium-high 4x option seems better if all we want are more steps to maximize the power available in a GPU.
__________________
madVR options explained |
|
27th November 2017, 13:25 | #47367 | Link | |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
Quote:
FWIW, once I switch to D3D11 rendering, NGU High + Very High will probably get a small speed boost. NGU Medium + Low probably not. |
|
27th November 2017, 13:36 | #47368 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,923
|
Quote:
|
|
27th November 2017, 13:51 | #47369 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 280
|
Quote:
And I doubt it too. I think there are a lot of outdated How to's out there where NNEDI3 was the best solution, before the era of NGU started. I think it will be fine to let NNEDI3 rest in peace.
__________________
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 |
|
27th November 2017, 14:08 | #47370 | Link | |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
Quote:
The new FSRCNNX_x2_r1_16-0-4-3.glsl is faster than FSRCNNX 32-0-2-2, but slower than FSRCNN 32-0-2. But at least it runs (although not smoothly). FSRCNNX 32-0-2-2 just freezes on my PC, for some reason, when trying to play video. So speed on my PC from fastest to slowest is: FSRCNN 32-0-2 > FSRCNNX 16-0-4-3 > FSRCNNX 32-0-2-2 Comparing quality, FSRCNN vs FSRCNNX has no clear winner, IMHO. Either one beats the other in some image areas. Overall I might prefer FSRCNN by a tiny amount. However, this is just my personal opinion, and only based on the one "Spirited Away" test image. So take it with a pinch of salt. |
|
27th November 2017, 18:53 | #47373 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 140
|
Quote:
With a 1280x694 source upscaled to UHD ( Source / NGU very High + Direct quadruple very High / NGU very High + Double again very High ) : Do you want to know what I find ugly ? Look at the external edges of his right ear : http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/124784 It looks like plastic, very fake, and less sharp. Even NGU + Jinc looks better than Direct quadruple IMHO. NGU + Double again looks a little better than NGU + Jinc. I do not use it now (not enough power), but I will with my next GPU because it is the best option. Last edited by Neo-XP; 27th November 2017 at 19:01. |
|
27th November 2017, 19:05 | #47374 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 4,407
|
I have to say I don't see it in your screen shot, double again looks a little sharper but no plastic look. I find direct quadruple results in a more natural look with my content.
__________________
madVR options explained |
27th November 2017, 19:09 | #47375 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 140
|
The edges are blurred, no texture, ugly.
It is as if the worst aspects of NGU were increased, but not the good ones. Last comparison to try to save the Double again algo ( Source / Direct quadruple / Double again ) : Look at this : http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/124788 I let you judge. Last edited by Neo-XP; 27th November 2017 at 19:51. |
27th November 2017, 19:23 | #47376 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
|
Quote:
profile=gpu-hq btw. also activates deband (and dithering). Vulkan doesn't show lower GPU usage than D3D11 on Nvidia. |
|
27th November 2017, 20:02 | #47378 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 160
|
Quote:
__________________
I'm infected with poor sources. |
|
27th November 2017, 20:02 | #47379 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 48
|
Quote:
|
|
27th November 2017, 22:39 | #47380 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 4,407
|
Quote:
Some of my content has this issue with NGU Sharp and some doesn't, for anything that shows double edges with NGU Sharp I use NGU AA.
__________________
madVR options explained |
|
Tags |
direct compute, dithering, error diffusion, madvr, ngu, nnedi3, quality, renderer, scaling, uhd upscaling, upsampling |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|