Search options (Page 7 of 9)

unrealit wrote:

Hi!

Sorry for the stupid Question!

But , How can i get Benchmark Values?

And what is HAGS?

What do you mean?

Thanks

use the script here.
https://github.com/AmusementClub/vs-mlrt/discussions/19

HAGS = Hardware Accelerated GPU Scheduling
you could google it for more info.

In RIFE with HAGS on performance might drop up to 25%.

RickyAstle98 wrote:

Please reatach my reedited comment again, dont reply to it, will be deleted

I deleted my reply so i don't have anything to reattach. Don't worry about it

RickyAstle98 wrote:

dawkinscm wrote:

Update:
I think my initial impressions were correct. For certain artefacts, Rife v4.15 lite 72fps works almost as well as Rife 4.15 60fps. For others they are about the same with both running at 60fps. So Rife v4.15 lite 72fps is not quite as smooth at 60fps but it minimises certain artefacts while being  smooth enough to not be a problem.

In my case problem not with artefacts, frames are mismatched or delayed a bit!

Is that for build_optimization or running at 72fps.

RickyAstle98 wrote:

But what TRT doing in my case? No drops no stutters but not smooth (any after 4.10), even with new optimization level, ah yes wait >
Builder optimization level 5 (default 3), adds another 3 minutes to build engine cache lock and only 3% performance!

Yeah I just tried it and if it is making a difference, it's at the margins and maybe pushing 4.15 lite closer to 4.15. But I will need to test with 4.15 to be sure. Also I'm not used to waiting this long for engine build anymore lol.

RickyAstle98 wrote:

With TRT 10.0 my RTX 4070 struggles to 24>96 hd source (4.16 lite realtime), but easy 24>120 with TRT 9.2 hehe!
Maybe you know solution, why any models after 4.10 not smooth enough? But difference between 4.12 and 4.4 a whole pit, but SMOOTHNESS drop?
Maybe its frame pacing problem, just listen, 4.4v2 24>72 looks very smooth, but has a lot artefacts (no dropped frames), starting 4.10 everything looks like every 3th frame are mismatched (still no dropped frames)!

As I said, trt 10.0 is "one to avoid" because it cuts performance by around 30% while possibly doubling GPU usage.

aloola wrote:

has anyone tried the option builder_optimization_level=5?
The resulting engine may have better performance compared to an engine built with a lower optimization level.

They key phrase there is "may" have better performance. Yes I've tried this a couple of times. It's supposed to try to find more potential heuristics from what I understand but I didn't notice any real difference. But I can't remember if I have tried with my increased workspace so I might try again.

RickyAstle98 wrote:

oriento wrote:

where is it available ?

https://github.com/AmusementClub/vs-mlr … nal-models

Uhhh my virus software is saying this straight up has a trojan in it...

flowreen91 wrote:

If done correctly, restart SVP and then you should be able to see selectable AI models with (v2) in their name like this:
https://gyazo.com/9d6d1360852e8e92f834425e69803cb0

im using ncnn/vulkan and theres no drop down menu for me, am i doing sthg wrong?
i downloaded the v4.14 model and named it "rife_v.4.14f" , put the name in the rife_trt_model section in application settings. how can i make sure it is using the correct model?

aloola wrote:

dawkinscm wrote:

Isn't this a separate issue to the TensorRT bug you refer to?  I don't think the use of dynamic shapes reduces the memory footprint enough to help @oriento who is literally running out of memory. Using performance mode reduces the amount of memory being used. Lower number Rife models also use less memory. Maybe for a 20 series card a user should do both by using the SVP default Rife 4.9 which works almost as well as later Rife models but is less taxing on the GPU.

it's the same
performance boost off = dynamic shape
performance boost on = static shape

you can test it yourself with performance boost off + model v2 4.7+

Oh right, good to know. After all this time still learning new things. Thanks

Blackfyre wrote:

It's banding and crushed blacks that are the issue.

Maybe Chainik is right.
Blackfyre can u please try to see if u can reproduce that exact scenario with:
RIFE disabled (normal interpolation) + SVP + MPV ? example: https://gyazo.com/8cedda0a3fe610f50810178b9e54da7b
How about
SVP (interpolation disabled) + MPV ? example: https://gyazo.com/21658ebad006e2bcf284a73e168be62e
How about
SVP fully closed + direct MPV launch ? example: https://gyazo.com/049c2643d14b0087b9c6354f7da73815
Would be nice to know that it's MPV fault cause of random decoders configurations and leave it at that xD

RickyAstle98 wrote:

Also I dont see need for RIFE+SVP content, because Lossless Scaling program updated to DXGI frame generation that only doubles framerate, VRR breaks, but its working, I do SVP to 82FPS and then enable LSFG and now I have 164FPS

RickyAstle98 I just tried the Lossless Scaling LSFG frame generation combined with MPV capped at 120 fps and i'm seeing major pixels wiggling issues.
It's like it tries to ununiformly speed up patches of screen, giving you an uneven movement like waves.
It looks like an abomination on this test scene: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ … drive_link
My suggestion would be to use the SVP resize parameter to resize video to a lower resolution until you hit the spot where your system can handle RIFE at "164 fps without dropping frames, issues, flickering, bla bla bla bla bla..."
That way SVP will fully control the scene movement at all times.

If you use Lossless Scaling app for the upscaling, i compared performance between using Lossless Scaling app with Nvidia Image Scaling ON and MPV with Nvidia Image Scaling shader and using the app was much slower.
You can add yourself the Nvidia Image Scaling shader by following the instructions here and compare the performance differences: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ … sp=sharing

Two things.
First is @Chainik saying that I no longer need to use copy? The manual still says use "copy-back".
Second, I thought @Blackfyre said that there was no difference between d3d11va and copy and I didn't see those differences in pictures. To me that made sense because it the mechanism should have nothing to do with color. But I see there is a massive difference in the two pictures which I must have somehow missed. But a possible explanation for the difference would be that it is being affected by SVP which brings me back to my first point.
So still confused.