• Thanks: 3

Topic: GPU Frame Interpolation?

So I finally got a chance to ask the madVR developers about frame server integration and possible benefits to performance with SVP: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p … ost1772653

Their response got me wondering how well SVP could perform if it was entirely handled by a dedicated GPU. I can't find much on GPU frame interpolation and nothing on GPU frame servers. Dmitrirender which is DirectX 11 based is the only one I could find, and it's been discussed here that it performs significantly worse than SVP but it is fast. It's more or less the same as the smooth motion option in madVR already I've heard.

I know rewriting SVP for DirectX 11 or Vulkan is out of the question, but would that be the only way? Would there be any point?

Re: GPU Frame Interpolation?

> I know rewriting SVP for DirectX 11 or Vulkan is out of the question, but would that be the only way?

"The only way" for what? Recent CPUs can handle any source up to 4K@30fps...
Comparing two hypothetical "SVP+madVR" media PCs configurations  - "i7 + 1060" (for SVP-on-CPU) or "celeron + 2*1080" (SVP-on-GPU) - I'd better choose the first one.

  • Thanks: 3

Re: GPU Frame Interpolation?

Meaning SVP-on-GPU is theoretically possible but would require extremely high end graphics cards. Good to know, thanks.

  • Thanks: 14

Re: GPU Frame Interpolation?

"The only way" for what? Recent CPUs can handle any source up to 4K@30fps...

Not at small block sizes though.

My OC'd 4670k isn't top end, but I'd say it's way above average, and it struggles at 1080p with smaller block sizes.



Also, doesn't AMD have something called "clear motion"? I force enabled it recently, but I didn't see any visual difference in the video players I tried.

  • Thanks: 97

Re: GPU Frame Interpolation?

brucethemoose wrote:

Not at small block sizes though.

My OC'd 4670k isn't top end, but I'd say it's way above average, and it struggles at 1080p with smaller block sizes.

If you don't use OpenCL GPU support?
And smaller isn't always better.

  • Thanks: 14

Re: GPU Frame Interpolation?

James D wrote:
brucethemoose wrote:

Not at small block sizes though.

My OC'd 4670k isn't top end, but I'd say it's way above average, and it struggles at 1080p with smaller block sizes.

If you don't use OpenCL GPU support?
And smaller isn't always better.

With OpenCL and a 7950.

Smaller looks significantly smoother to me, but it eats CPU like crazy.

  • Thanks: 8

Re: GPU Frame Interpolation?

brucethemoose wrote:

"The only way" for what? Recent CPUs can handle any source up to 4K@30fps...

Not at small block sizes though.

My OC'd 4670k isn't top end, but I'd say it's way above average, and it struggles at 1080p with smaller block sizes.



Also, doesn't AMD have something called "clear motion"? I force enabled it recently, but I didn't see any visual difference in the video players I tried.

Have you tried blueskyFRC?  That one utilizes AMD Fluid Motion Video

  • Thanks: 1

Re: GPU Frame Interpolation?

river wrote:
brucethemoose wrote:

"The only way" for what? Recent CPUs can handle any source up to 4K@30fps...

Not at small block sizes though.

My OC'd 4670k isn't top end, but I'd say it's way above average, and it struggles at 1080p with smaller block sizes.



Also, doesn't AMD have something called "clear motion"? I force enabled it recently, but I didn't see any visual difference in the video players I tried.

Have you tried blueskyFRC?  That one utilizes AMD Fluid Motion Video

Doesn't seem to work on Windows 7 sad