Blackfyre wrote:
Chainik wrote:

> And please update MPV to the latest stable v0.38.0

nope, it crashes playing DoVi

Oh wow, that sucks, why would they push that out as a "stable" release. Crazy.

The way mpv is built and in particular its reliance on other large libraries means that "stable" is relative. So even without the DoVI issue I agree that they shouldn't upgrade. If anything they should be one version behind the latest version to ensure stability.

If you wish to use 0.38 then SVP will still find mpv as long as you put the files in the mp64 folder. Just make sure you stop SVP from installing mpv. This is what I do because I use my own mpv builds.

The bottom line with this is that we are all just trying out stuff and reporting back. We are all learning together.

Xenocyde wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:

Exactly smile Especially since I can see minor but perceptible differences between v4.15 and v4.15v2 that I don't remember seeing in other models.

So V4.15 is better than V4.15V2 now? Didn't you say that V2 is better?

I would be surprised if I ever said that Rife v2 has better picture quality, but if I did say that then was incorrect. But there definitely was a time when v2 was better/quicker at FF/REW a video, but that is no longer the case. 


Xenocyde wrote:

I tried both and couldn't see any visual difference.

I said the difference was "minor" but "perceptible" and I'm watching on a very large VR Cinema screen so I'm going to see things that others don't. That's why I wouldn't use anything below Rife v4.9.  Over the development time of Rife from v4.6 to v4.15 I've seen artefacts improve to the point where they either disappear or have been reduced.  Vertical fast movement artefacts are still an issue but v4.15/v2 handles those the best.

flowreen91 wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:

But after downscaling is it still necessary to use v2?

Nope, we can use v1 just fine and never see the visual bug.

Exactly smile Especially since I can see minor but perceptible differences between v4.15 and v4.15v2 that I don't remember seeing in other models.

flowreen91 wrote:

After further investigation it seems the v2 issue is caused by old .dll files.

Thanks for the extra testing and I remember now that you also said this in January when I asked why I should upgrade to TRT9. But after downscaling is it still necessary to use v2?

pensioner600 wrote:
Chainik wrote:

> How can I change the TRT version? And how can I find out the current version? I really don’t like the scene change on any model at any 6%-100% values.

this isn't related to the TRT version at all
TRT version can only affect build time, memory usage and overall performance

Are there any other settings besides rife_sc that affect scene changes? I really don’t like how it works, I’ve already tried many options. It's as if the algorithm in the next scene is confused and momentarily doesn't know what to do. Everything is perfect, smooth as butter, except for this trouble with the scene change.

You're just going to have to experiment and see what works best for you. Most of my movies work well with almost any SC or even turning it off. But I've got a couple that need SC to be set to I had to find a balance.

Chainik wrote:

dawkinscm
> If you have to use Rife v2 and have picture shaking issues then updating vslmrt makes sense.

only for TRT>=9
with TRT8 updating vsmlrt.py most likely does nothing
only difference between SVP's vsmlrt.py and current master is one line:

# TensorRT 9.0 or later
"ONNXTRT_Broadcast_*:fp32"

Noted thanks. I'm currently using v4.15 but if I go back to a v2 model then I will update TRT. Cheers smile

If you have to use Rife v2 and have picture shaking issues then updating vslmrt makes sense.  I reset everything back to default (minus some script changes) then updated to TRT8.6. Not going beyond that unless someone can show me how TRT9 improves things*. Not sure why anyone would update to TRT 10.

Update:
*TRT9 is required if you are using Rife v2 and have the picture shaking issue.

Xenocyde wrote:

I've been using V2 or V2 lite models for some time now (maybe 6+ months) and never noticed any shakiness. My vslmrt version is 3.18.16, says it was last modified in December 2023. Does that mean it includes the shake fix?

Yes.


flowreen91 wrote:
pensioner600 wrote:

How can I change the TRT version?

pensioner600 if you would like to update vsmirt to fix the v2 picture shake, follow the instructions from here:
https://www.svp-team.com/forum/viewtopi … 735#p83735

No. As @Chainik stated above, this is nothing to do with TRT version.

Chainik wrote:

one more time, what is the exact point of "v2"? hmm

it's not-faster or even slower, and it takes more RAM. so, why?

While it's no longer significantly faster, the release notes say it reduces "PCie traffic flow". From personal experience this helps a lot for real time processing and provides more GPU headroom. Before I started to use downscaling, I was regularly hitting 100% GPU, but the v2 models would bring that down to 90% or less depending on the model.

But @Chainik thanks for the reminder because it's been a while since I used a non v2 model and unlike previous models, v4.15 seems to handle artefacts a "touch" better than the v2 version.

flowreen91 wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:
pensioner600 wrote:

I also noticed that ALL versions of V2 give the entire picture a shake,

There was a bug with Rife v2 which has been fixed since vslmrt script 3.18.4 released November last year. I think this bug caused picture shake issue.

Should SVP devs upgrade the out of the box vsmirt script so they will fix it for all users?
(knowing that non-lazy users might play around with v2 versions for that extra performance and run into that bug)

lazy is harsh lol. But if the issue is vslmrt and you want to upgrade then I would recommend upgrading to the November 2023 script and not later because later vslmrt scripts made changes that require mods to the helper script too.

pensioner600 wrote:

I also noticed that ALL versions of V2 give the entire picture a shake,

There was a bug with Rife v2 which has been fixed since vslmrt script 3.18.4 released November last year. I think this bug caused picture shake issue.


RAGEdemon wrote:

Each iteration after 4.4 causes a massive performance hit @~16% for minimal artefact improvement.

I know you are not replying to me but I think your comments are interesting so I hope you don't mind me responding directly to you. As you say, there is a massive performance hit. But you have been very lucky if you haven't come across the horrible artefacts that appear below 4.9.

RAGEdemon wrote:

Above 4.9 is trained mostly on Anime.

Being "trained on Anime" or not doesn't matter if it still results in improved live action motion. Rife v4.9 and above are all smoother and have much less visible artefacts than below 4.9.

RAGEdemon wrote:

What you say doesn't make sense to me. You say you don't use 4.4 because "too much artefacts (not critical but noticeable)", but then you are happy to force downscale all 4K and 1080p content to 1280x720p?! And you don't notice the huge degradation in quality?

I am guessing you don't have a 4K display, or else you wouldn't be saying something so seemingly bizarre smile

To each their own, I guess...

Resolution is important but only up to a point. Although I personally would not downscale to 720p I do now downscale my 1920x2160 3D blu-rays to 1080p.   On a near IMAX VR screen, I've tried both upscaling to 4K and downscaling to 1080p and found no "visible" difference between the two. For actual 4K content there is a difference, but it will only be a problem on very large of screens. For most people watching on a TV, there will be little visible difference unless you decide to stand in directly in front of the screen.

Done some more testing and I've learned or at least confirmed a few things. Not sure I see any real benefits with Tensor 9 and Tensor 10 seems to be moving further away from us. So I'm sticking with the last non LLM Tensor 8.6.1 along with the latest vslmrt to have the most up to date build defaults. Using BO=5 but I see no obvious difference to the default. 72fps seems to be the sweet spot for me which might be because the thrown away frames reduces the effect of certain fast movement artefacts. There's more but that about summarises it.

RickyAstle98 wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:
RickyAstle98 wrote:

This type of denoisers is without quality loss...

Which one is it? The Open Intel Denoiser?

Yes, propably, I need denoiser for 720p sources, I dont prefer adjust sharpness level while watching 24>168 4.15v2lite!

BTW Apologies but I just did a Google search and the OID is the name that kept on coming up.  I didn't know that it was for images only until after you said yes and I investigated a bit more. So I am really interested in finding out the actual name of this Intel denoiser.

RickyAstle98 wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:
RickyAstle98 wrote:

This type of denoisers is without quality loss...

Which one is it? The Open Intel Denoiser?

Yes, propably, I need denoiser for 720p sources, I dont prefer adjust sharpness level while watching 24>168 4.15v2lite!

*deleted*

RickyAstle98 wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:
RickyAstle98 wrote:

Anybody has mpv shader like Intel denoiser (which makes all videos looks pretty without quality loss)?

I wouldn't recommend ever using a denoiser unless you have poor quality sources. You say "without quality loss" but with any denoiser there is always a risk of losing high frequency detail.

This type of denoisers is without quality loss...

Which one is it? The Open Intel Denoiser?

RickyAstle98 wrote:

Anybody has mpv shader like Intel denoiser (which makes all videos looks pretty without quality loss)?

I wouldn't recommend ever using a denoiser unless you have poor quality sources. You say "without quality loss" but with any denoiser there is always a risk of losing high frequency detail.

aloola wrote:

mpc-BE + mpc-VR (RTX HDR + RTX SuperRes) + SVP RIFE give you the best experience and easy to config.

also for mpv I found this is a good shader for anime/real-life videos https://github.com/cunnyplapper/CuNNy/t … r/mpv/fp16

I just tried CuNNY and 4x32 is the best option matching FSRCNNX_x2_16-0-4. But CuNNy 4x32 is similar to nnedi32 in that it's heavier on GPU, especially when using SVP.


Drakko01 wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:
Drakko01 wrote:

I've been using RIFE since it became available and I never thought it could improve this much. BTW which is the full resolution of your rips and wich resolution its your display

1920x2160.

It's a odd resolution to use and also a odd screen resolution. Can you explain the reason for choosing that resolution in your rips?

I didn't choose it. This is the standard resolution for 3D blu-ray.

aloola wrote:

mpc-BE + mpc-VR (RTX HDR + RTX SuperRes) + SVP RIFE give you the best experience and easy to config.

also for mpv I found this is a good shader for anime/real-life videos https://github.com/cunnyplapper/CuNNy/t … r/mpv/fp16

Thanks for the link. In general I tend to downscale to FHD rather than upscale because there is zero advantage to upscaling my own sources. But this could be useful for poor quality acquired stuff so I will give it a go. Also I don't use a PC for 4K HDR.

Drakko01 wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:

Today I tried MPC+MadVR with a simpler config and it still couldn't handle my full resolution rips using Rife. However saying all that I'm also happy running my files reduced to FHD since it uses around 40% less GPU with Rife v4.15v2.

I've been using RIFE since it became available and I never thought it could improve this much. BTW which is the full resolution of your rips and wich resolution its your display

1920x2160.

Drakko01 wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:
Drakko01 wrote:

I am exactly at your numbers even using TRT 9.2.

I was always  curious why the devs never updated the TRT Version if there its a reason not to.

It's not stable. When you you are at my numbers with TRT 9.2, are you running large files that have 2x the vertical resolution of a FHD file at 72fps on v4.15?

Maybe i I didn't understood what resolution do you use, but you statement was a little vague...

Generally I play 4k sources downscale to 1920*800 by svp and upscale to 2560*1440 with madvr.

That makes sense. Especially since mpv works much better than MPC+MadVR for SVP+Rife. Today I tried MPC+MadVR with a simpler config and it still couldn't handle my full resolution rips using Rife. However saying all that I'm also happy running my files reduced to FHD since it uses around 40% less GPU with Rife v4.15v2.

I downloaded the latest version of MPC-BE today and I realised a few things. Firstly, for users with lower spec GPUs, MPC is the best choice over MPV because MPV is basically MPC+MadVR. If you want to add MadVR then MPV is more efficient and uses less resources.

The other thing I realised is that if you play a video file with HD audio connected to an external amp it uses about 20% more GPU. Using the GPU makes sense, I just didn't realise how much GPU is potentially used.

Drakko01 wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:
RickyAstle98 wrote:

FHD or 4K?

Higher than FHD but definitely not 4k. At FHD I can run a little higher at 75fps.

BTW After more testing with the default TRT 8.5.1, Rife v4.16 lite and v4.15 lite are almost identical. Rife v4.15 is slightly better than both. I don't know about anyone else but for me, it looks like I should have stuck with the default TRT.

I am exactly at your numbers even using TRT 9.2.

I was always  curious why the devs never updated the TRT Version if there its a reason not to.

It's not stable. When you you are at my numbers with TRT 9.2, are you running large files that have 2x the vertical resolution of a FHD file at 72fps on v4.15?

RickyAstle98 wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:

Now that I'm back on TRT8.5.1 I am able to run Rife v4.15v2 at 72fps which uses about 75-90% GPU. The lite version uses about 60-80% GPU. For me I suppose that it goes without saying that:

4.15v2/72 > 4.15v2 lite/72 > 4.15v2/60 > 4.15v2/60 lite > everything else.

FHD or 4K?

Higher than FHD but definitely not 4k. At FHD I can run a little higher at 75fps.

BTW After more testing with the default TRT 8.5.1, Rife v4.16 lite and v4.15 lite are almost identical. Rife v4.15 is slightly better than both. I don't know about anyone else but for me, it looks like I should have stuck with the default TRT.

Now that I'm back on TRT8.5.1 I am able to run Rife v4.15v2 at 72fps which uses about 75-90% GPU. The lite version uses about 60-80% GPU. For me I suppose that it goes without saying that:

4.15v2/72 > 4.15v2 lite/72 > 4.15v2/60 > 4.15v2/60 lite > everything else.