You are not logged in. Please login or register.
SmoothVideo Project → Using SVP → i7 6700 with IGP only
Hi, I plan to purchase a machine mainly for work, but would also like to watch soap effect movies.
Question, is i7 6700 (non K) with just the intel 530 IGP sufficient for highest profile SVP settings?
hd 4600 was already enough, 530 should be much faster... not with madVR though
Well technically it could work with MadVR, but you'd probably have to use settings that are low enough that you wouldn't really get any benefit from using MadVR in the first place. 
can too many cores/i7 be deemed overkill for using svp?
I browsed through the forum here, i saw a comment saying that i5 is sufficient for using highest profile settings in SVP.
skylake i5 6600 vs i7 6700?
interested in getting the most out of svp for best quality soap effects, without purchasing external GPU card.
It all depends on the resolution and frame rate of the video; 1080p is more demanding than 720p, and 60fps to 120Hz is more demanding than 30fps to 120Hz.
Also, unlike some games, SVP is extremely multi-thread friendly, so it very much can take advantage of SMT / hyperthreading.
Lastly, having a discrete GPU won't make much difference at all unless you plan on using MadVR.
can too many cores/i7 be deemed overkill for using svp?
I browsed through the forum here, i saw a comment saying that i5 is sufficient for using highest profile settings in SVP.skylake i5 6600 vs i7 6700?
interested in getting the most out of svp for best quality soap effects, without purchasing external GPU card.
I had an i5 3570K Overclocked at 4.2Ghz and when I changed to an i7 4790K Overclocked at 4.7Ghz more than a year ago, I noticed a massive difference. And it gave me more options to use much better settings to achieve better results too.
That was back in the SVP 3.x.x Days (which was a lot more power hungry). SVP 4 is faster though, so I am sure it's less effective now, but I'd say the upgrade was worth it in my opinion.
I have a videocard, a Gigabyte 7970 Ghz (280x), and I don't use it for GPU acceleration, I use it for Madvr. With SVP I use my HD4600 which comes with my 4790K for GPU Acceleration. Generally speaking, and many people seem confused about this, SVP does not use the GPU for motion interpolation. It only ever uses it with GPU Acceleration enabled. Having a strong GPU is not as important for SVP as having a strong CPU.
The only reason I have a GPU is to allow me to play games, and to use Madvr with Media Player Classic for much improved picture quality. Otherwise I wouldn't even need it.
Thanks for the informative feedback!
This leads me to the next question, are the effects huge moving from 60hz to 120hz?
If yes, what would be the recommended monitor to get?
I did try to research, for 120hz monitors to work, i must get an nvidia card?
I cannot say whether 120Hz would be a huge difference because my primary monitor is a CRT, and using 60Hz on a CRT is a flicker-fest so 90+ Hz is kind of a requirement. Therefore I cannot recommend any monitor, but I personally would get one with Adaptive Sync (future Intel iGPUs will support it, possibly starting with Kaby Lake). Really, I'd say that you'd get a bigger benefit from just interpolating to exact multiples, like 25fps to 75Hz rather than 25fps to 60Hz.
Uhh, no, you don't need an Nvidia card...why would you need that? O_o Both Intel and AMD GPUs can handle 120Hz perfectly fine seeing how I use both an integrated Intel GPU and discrete AMD GPU on my CRT monitor at 90+HZ.
Regarding performance, 120Hz is barely more demanding except in two cases:
1. Doing 5x interpolation, like doing 24fps to 120Hz is quite a bit more demanding than doing 4x interpolation like 24fps to 96Hz.
2. Interpolating 60fps to 120Hz considerably more demanding because that'd be at least twice as many frames being interpolated every second (though SVP doesn't interpolate frame rates greater than 47fps by default; see: http://www.svp-team.com/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=56025)
i will be getting an LCD/LED monitor.
i read that to get 120hz or 144hz, the manufacturer will need to implement a g-sync chip into the monitor, and nvidia card is required to drive that.
i read that to get 120hz or 144hz, the manufacturer will need to implement a g-sync chip into the monitor, and nvidia card is required to drive that.
G-sync can be seen as Nvidia's proprietary exclusive version of Adaptive Sync, and both G-sync and Adaptive Sync have nothing to do with 120Hz or 144Hz - consider that there are 60Hz monitors that come with G-sync or Adaptive Sync, just as there are 120Hz and 144Hz monitors that lack G-sync and Adaptive Sync. Not only that, but 120Hz and 144Hz monitors were around before G-sync or Adaptive Sync ever existed.
Are you familiar with what "refresh rate" is? Most PC displays default to 60Hz, but they aren't forced to using 60Hz - a good amount can run at 72Hz without issue, and 75Hz was very common back with CRTs. All a 120Hz and 144Hz monitor does is run at an even higher refresh rate.
Do you play games or just watch movies/series?
If I was you I'd buy a TV and connect it to the computer. I gave up on on monitors as a 43" TV gives a much greater viewing experience.
I doubt the different between 60FPS and 120FPS is significant, but it should be noticeable. The difference between 30FPS in gaming and 60FPS is massive, going from 60 to 120 is a good change too, but nowhere near the massive jump from 24 FPS to 60FPS.
So even if you want to go monitor, and don't like the TV option. I recommend a really high quality 60Hz monitor with an IPS Panel.
Maybe the 2K resolution (2560x1440) Dell monitors?
IPS Panel
OK, this is one thing I can not recommend. IPS has the worst black levels around, and unless most of your media viewing happens in a bright environment, you would have considerably worse contrast than with a VA panel.
Heck, for TVs, I'm in the "OLED or best" camp, but that's obviously quite a bit more expensive.
Also, I'm still a fan of adaptive sync, but it's not really required, it's just that it's cheap and practically guarantees that you'd be able to run at certain refresh rates (again, remember that exact multiples of the source framerate are better than fractions).
i did more research on 120hz monitors.
It seems that skylake integrated graphics can only drive 60hz max.
I do not want to purchase external gpu, so i guess i can forget about 120hz 
It seems that skylake integrated graphics can only drive 60hz max.
Can you please tell me where you are you finding this supposed information? From everything I know about GPUs, this seems quite wrong to me, and I myself even run Haswell integrated graphics at 120Hz quite frequently (I just did last night!).
Not only that, but Intel (like both AMD and Nvidia) support custom resolutions and refresh rates, so even if it didn't support 120Hz out of the box, you should simply be able to manually add it - that's what I did (because CRTs only used EDIDs as guidelines, so they pretty much never include their full capabilities such as running at 90+Hz).
Even if there's some freaky weird glitch that's occuring that is preventing Skylake iGPUs from running at refresh rates above 60Hz, just remember that Intel isn't the only option around - after all, AMD will be launching their AM4 platform any day now.
i saw that information in the asus motherboard website
Integrated Graphics Processor- Intel® HD Graphics support
Multi-VGA output support : HDMI/DVI-D/RGB ports
- Supports HDMI with max. resolution 4096 x 2160 @ 24 Hz / 2560 x 1600 @ 60 Hz
- Supports DVI-D with max. resolution 1920 x 1200 @ 60 Hz
- Supports RGB with max. resolution 1920 x 1200 @ 60 Hz
But as you mentioned, i might be able to pull this off by setting custom refresh.
May i know which connector you tried on haswell with 120hz? hdmi? dvi? rgb?
Oh, your mobo doesn't have a DisplayPort output nor a dual-link DVI? Hmmm, most 120Hz monitors require one of those ports unless it's one of those fancy new monitors with adaptive sync over HDMI.
For reference, mathematically, 1920x1080 @ 120Hz only takes a little more bandwidth than 2560x1600 @ 60Hz; and even if you weren't able to run at a full 120Hz, you could still use 100Hz for 25fps, 96Hz for 24fps, and 90Hz for 30fps.
i plan to get budget nvidia card that has dual-link DVI.
Then get a benq gaming monitor 144hz, either XL2411z or XL2720Z.
is it ok to get a gaming monitor for the purpose of getting higher than 60hz smooth video playback?
This is a TN panel..
If this is not ok, my other choice is a dell ultrasharp IPS panel at 60hz..
TN panel - less accurate colors at 144hz
IPS panel - more accurate colors at 60hz?
I have only 2 choices, benq and dell 
To work with colors (especially with shades of white and black) you need not TN. TN can't show these shades. I have IPS and TN monitors:
- Acer AL2623W td, 1920х1200, 25.5" IPS 60Hz;
- ASUS VG248QE, 1920x1080, 24", TN 144Hz.
When I need to get true colors I use my Acer. When I need stereo 3D with NVIDIA glasses I use Asus. When I need to watch movie with smooth motion I use both, but Asus much often
thanks for your answer.
just curious, do you need to turn on lightboost for watching movies?
the budget nvidia i plan to get do not have lightboost/gsync.
is it fine for watching movies at 144hz?
will i get screen tearing?
i plan to get budget nvidia card that has dual-link DVI.
May I ask what kind of GPU price-point you are looking at? I may not have much advice on monitors, but GPUs are much more of my forte.
You know, before you go spending money on new fancy-pants monitor, I can go compare and test a 30fps video interpolated to 60Hz and 120Hz - while 60Hz is normally a flicker fest on a CRT, it not that bad for videos that aren't bright or for short periods of time. The only issue is that 60Hz on a CRT will look smoother than it would on a standard LCD...
But even if you do decide to purchase with a 120Hz+ monitor, you might as well get the monitor first and see if it works perfectly fine with your integrated Intel GPU - if you went and bought any discrete GPU only to find out that you didn't need it, you'd be kicking yourself after-the-fact.
the budget nvidia i plan to get do not have lightboost/gsync.
You do not need g-sync nor lightboost, and some monitors have a built-in backlight strobing that work with any GPU (I know that there's a 120Hz Eizo VA monitor with it).
Also it's important to note that G-sync not only has a decent price premium but also can only be used with Nvidia GPU. If you don't want to pay the extra cost or be tied to Nvidia just to take advantage of G-sync, then consider looking into an Adaptive Sync monitor instead (which is a VESA standard; AMD currently supports it and Intel will support it in a future iGPU, possibly Kaby Lake).
i am looking at nvidia GT 710. it is a low profile gpu that can be run fanless. how did you get your haswell integrated graphics running at 120hz? using displayport? i am 'quite sure' for intel integrated graphics, it cannot do dual link, and the only way is to go for displayport.
i am looking at nvidia GT 710. it is a low profile gpu that can be run fanless.
As for the GPU, considering that you're spending several hundred on a CPU and monitor, then I would at least look at something like an RX 460 as a basiline (~$100 USD) which would not only have enough performance that you could use it for something like MadVR but also have a feature set for newer and future displays (in particular DisplayPort 1.4, HDMI 2.0b, Adaptive Sync, and HDR).
The alternative would be to go an all-in-one AMD route with a Bristol Ridge APU, but CPU performance will be lacking vs Intel until late 2016 with Zen CPUs which require a discrete GPU anyway, or Raven Ridge APUs which have on-die Radeon graphics but won't be available until early 2017.
how did you get your haswell integrated graphics running at 120hz? using displayport? i am 'quite sure' for intel integrated graphics, it cannot do dual link, and the only way is to go for displayport.
HDMI can do it; even HDMI 1.4 has enough bandwidth to do 1080p at 120Hz, but not a lot of displays actually accept 120Hz over HDMI. It's apparently more common to reach slightly lower refresh rates like 96Hz.
One thing to remember is that 5x interpolation is considerably more intensive than 4x interpolation, so you might want to first make sure that you even have the necessary grunt...but even then, because 4x is less intensive, you might actually be able to use higher SVP settings and therefore would actually be better than 120Hz.
not sure if i can wait for rx 460 to be released.
GT 750 Ti, and GT 950 are also good choices?
will skylake i7-6700 (non-k) be able to handle 1080p 120hz and 144hz?
not sure if i can wait for rx 460 to be released.
The NDA lifts in only 9 days, surely you're not that impatient...
GT 750 Ti, and GT 950 are also good choices?
Only if you're OK with having a GPU that could very well be completely outclassed in nearly every way in 9 days or so.
will skylake i7-6700 (non-k) be able to handle 1080p 120hz and 144hz?
Maybe I wasn't clear enough - the answer is "maybe". There are too many variables at stake to know for absolute 100% sure if such a thing works or not due to the somewhat hit-and-miss nature of getting high refresh rates without DisplayPort, dual-link DVI, or HDMI 2.0.
The GPU can theoretically do it, but that's the best I can say because my own monitor can do 120Hz but not at 1080p (not a GPU limitation since it occurs with a Radeon 5870 as well).
SmoothVideo Project → Using SVP → i7 6700 with IGP only
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.