Search options (Page 2 of 17)
RickyAstle98 wrote:dawkinscm wrote:RickyAstle98 wrote:Im already playing games with DLSS4 SR without new driver, Transformer model looks awesome!
I watched a deep dive into the 5090 architecture and boy is it AI focussed and not games focussed at all. They could have made a cheaper card which actually performed better for games. But instead they made an AI card that can be used for games. This could be great for Rife. Unfortunately this probably only applies to the 5090 because the 5080 is so far behind it in performance, that some argue it's really a 5070.
Unlike previous generation, 4070 was 50% of 4090 performance on 4K average output, according to 5080/5090 review tests, I think 5070 would be 45% of 5090 now!
Something like that. We thought the 4080 was a little far being the 4090, but the 5080 is even further behind the 5090. So far that some are saying that it is almost guaranteed that a 5080ti will have to appear to fill the gap.
RickyAstle98 wrote:dawkinscm wrote:Xenocyde wrote:I got the latest version and don't see any Smooth Motion option in it.
I'm not talking about Smooth Motion which is why I specifically mentioned DLSS4. I'm not sure how useful Smooth Motion would be if it is as bad as described above.
Im already playing games with DLSS4 SR without new driver, Transformer model looks awesome!
I watched a deep dive into the 5090 architecture and boy is it AI focussed and not games focussed at all. They could have made a cheaper card which actually performed better for games. But instead they made an AI card that can be used for games. This could be great for Rife. Unfortunately this probably only applies to the 5090 because the 5080 is so far behind it in performance, that some argue it's really a 5070.
Xenocyde wrote:dawkinscm wrote:The new Nvidia app enables some of the better DLSS4 algorithms for all Nvidia cards. Not sure if they meant to do that but apparently it works pretty well.
I got the latest version and don't see any Smooth Motion option in it.
I'm not talking about Smooth Motion which is why I specifically mentioned DLSS4. I'm not sure how useful Smooth Motion would be if it is as bad as described above.
RickyAstle98 wrote:According to NVIDIA descriptions, this is driver-based AI model delivers smoother gameplay by inferring an additional frame between two rendered frames on GeForce RTX 50 Series GPUs!
If thats not DLSS Multi Frame Generation at all, we have brand new driver-based interpolation now? What a shame, no FG for all RTX users!
For games without DLSS Frame Generation support, NVIDIA Smooth Motion is a new option for enhancing your experience! *NVIDIA
The new Nvidia app enables some of the better DLSS4 algorithms for all Nvidia cards. Not sure if they meant to do that but apparently it works pretty well.
RickyAstle98 wrote:dawkinscm wrote:RickyAstle98 wrote:According to 5090 reviewers: the 5090 runs 4.25 heavy 42% faster than RTX 4090 card!
Which GPU reviewers are reviewing SVP?
Thats was my personal reques for Linus benchmark, If you dont believe me, not my problem!
When did belief become an issue? Linus is not the most trustworthy person but I don't have an opinion on this issue one way or the other. I simply asked who was the reviewer.
RickyAstle98 wrote:Hottea wrote:Do you guys think something like 5090 finally get us above 4k 60hz with newest models or there are another bottlenecks like DDR bandwidth like some ppl have been saying?
According to 5090 reviewers: the 5090 runs 4.25 heavy 42% faster than RTX 4090 card!
Which GPU reviewers are reviewing SVP?
RickyAstle98 wrote:scb wrote:What is the lossless scaling algorithm vs SVP vs SVP RIFE, all like?
RIFE better overall but 8 times heavier than SVP4 basic algo!
LSFG better than SVP4 basic algo!
But you were able to combine Rife and LSFG?
RickyAstle98 wrote:No improvement in realtime performance across all models, almost the same transcoding speed (0.8% slower), but new heavy models runs 5% faster now!
RTX 4070
Going back to Lossless Scaling. The only app I see is a Steam Application which I wouldn't want to run. Where is the non steam version?
Forget it. I think I found it thanks 
Testing might reveal something else, but there's nothing obvious in the change log except possible improvements for lower specced GPUs below RTX4070ti.
odedg wrote:Hi,
What is expected uplift in RIFE from RTX 4090 to 5090 ?
Is it about 30% or more ?
The 30% number is generally for gaming, but 30% does track with the increase of Tensor cores and other hardware. So it could be 30%, it could be more, it could be less. The only certainty is that it will use more power.
RickyAstle98 wrote:Part of my message got lost. I was asking how are you actually running LSFG? I have not seen anything except for a steam package.
I will upload quick video YT guide, I cant record generated frames from LSFG overlay!
https://youtu.be/8cIXy2IuMAs
Oh I see. It's part of the new Nvidia app.
RickyAstle98 wrote:dawkinscm wrote:RickyAstle98 wrote:As you can see, I did RIFE x3 (1st action) on movie, then (LSFG3 x2) ontop!
I'm probably missing something obvious but how are you applying it? I only see a Steam implementation, nothing else.
The LSFG3 x3 alone: looks choppier and less accurate than RIFE x3 mode, takes 8 times less resources!
Thats better solution for 4K videos for example! For HFR monitor owners SPECIFICALLY!
Usage: when your GPU able to do 3x RIFE with 4K input, theres enough GPU headroom to RIFE x2 + LSFG3 x3 ontop without 100% usage!
For 144Hz users (1080p output / 4070 power levels): RIFE x3 + LSFG x2 = looks very smooth (24>144 / GPU usage 70% ~120W)
For 240Hz users (1080p output / 4070 power levels): RIFE x2.5 + LSFG3 x4 = looks very smooth and accurate (24>240 / GPU usage 80% ~130W)
For 360Hz users (1080p output / 4070 power levels): RIFE x3 + LSFG3 x5 = looks very smooth and accurate (24>360)
All tests done with 4.4v2 model (old) for GPU usage local measurement, newest models almost 2 times heavier, the multiplier decision, gentlemens, is up to you!
Part of my message got lost. I was asking how are you actually running LSFG? I have not seen anything except for a steam package.
RickyAstle98 wrote:raider10 wrote:RickyAstle98 wrote:LSFG3 vs LSFG2 on any multipliers - smoother and better! Quality increased, same fast transitions now look more accurate, not just a fluid!
Im using RIFE x3 + LSFG x2 for 24>144 movies conversion, usually GPU usage looks like RIFE x4 with 6x real FLUIDITY rate!
On videos with LSFG3 only, looks pretty normal, conversion from 24FPS is less accurate, but smooth enough!
Do you do it with lossless scaling?
As you can see, I did RIFE x3 (1st action) on movie, then (LSFG3 x2) ontop!
I'm probably missing something obvious but how are you applying it? I only see a Steam implementation, nothing else.
The LSFG3 x3 alone: looks choppier and less accurate than RIFE x3 mode, takes 8 times less resources!
Thats better solution for 4K videos for example! For HFR monitor owners SPECIFICALLY! Usage: when your GPU able to do 3x RIFE with 4K input, theres enough GPU headroom to RIFE x2 + LSFG3 x3 ontop without 100% usage!
narkohol wrote:Does changing these as suggested in vsmlrt.py make sense for RTX 40XX gpus?
If yes... which numbers are recommended for 'Streams' and 'Workspace'?
any other recommendations for the other parameters?
What changes?
Drakko01 wrote:dawkinscm wrote:Drakko01 wrote:Exactly right, it kinda like the new 4.25_heavy, but reintroduce some artifacts the most models has for especific scene that 4.25 was fixed already, I hope see a combination of the two in the next model
Are you seeing any difference between the old v4.25_heavy and the new smaller one? Have you guys tried the new 4.25_heavy with SC disabled?
I only have the smaller 4.25?heavy 82.6MB, glad to look into the differences of the old 4.25h if you provide a link for download the file.
I like very much the smoothness of heavy version, most of the time , but with miss the interpolation in some scene at the point that can't used instead of 4.25. If this " errors" where fix maintaining the overall smoothness or fine a way to eliminate/minimize I will be glad to use 4.25h as main.
I give you three examples that what i'm saying for you to test. Comments are appreciated.
Avengers at 1:53:23 after Hulk jumps of the 3° building
Avengers Endgame at 2:19:12 after Drax stab Cull Obsidian , and Pepper(Rescue Armor) fly across the screen
Spiderman No way home at 38:00 when spiderman drop hanging of the bridge after the car fell. And 38:20 after Doc OP take the nanotech and camera pans 360 around him.
Am not saying that 4.25 make this scenes perfect, but managed in a way much less disrupted.
Doesn't matter now plus the link no longer exists.
RickyAstle98 wrote:dawkinscm wrote:Drakko01 wrote:Exactly right, it kinda like the new 4.25_heavy, but reintroduce some artifacts the most models has for especific scene that 4.25 was fixed already, I hope see a combination of the two in the next model
Are you seeing any difference between the old v4.25_heavy and the new smaller one? Have you guys tried the new 4.25_heavy with SC disabled?
The 4.25 lite (new) worse than most older models!
Performance? Can do 7x from HD source (24>168/720p)
Smoothness? Smoother than 4.15 model, but choppy sometimes!
Artefacts? A lot! Very noticeable difference against heavy!
The SC disabled!
RTX 4070
The QUALITY models
4.9/4.10/4.12/4.15/4.15l/4.18
The SMOOTH models
4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9/4.10/4.25h
What about 4.25h 100MB vs 4.25h 80MB?
Drakko01 wrote:Blackfyre wrote:Having said that, artefact masking is not as good as the original 4.25 that was released as a beta.
I am glad that was released as a beta, because that older one still remains the best quality version IMO and better than 4.18 too.
Exactly right, it kinda like the new 4.25_heavy, but reintroduce some artifacts the most models has for especific scene that 4.25 was fixed already, I hope see a combination of the two in the next model
Are you seeing any difference between the old v4.25_heavy and the new smaller one? Have you guys tried the new 4.25_heavy with SC disabled?
Drakko01 wrote:Blackfyre wrote:Having said that, artefact masking is not as good as the original 4.25 that was released as a beta.
I am glad that was released as a beta, because that older one still remains the best quality version IMO and better than 4.18 too.
Exactly right, it kinda like the new 4.25_heavy, but reintroduce some artifacts the most models has for especific scene that 4.25 was fixed already, I hope see a combination of the two in the next model
Have you guys tried the new 4.25_heavy with SC disabled?
There's new versions of 4.25lite and heavy uploaded a few hours ago.
I checked for any improvements in artefact handling but I couldn't find any. I already have smooth Rife, but it does seem to be a little smoother and performs well in my forward/reverse direction tests.
flowreen91 wrote:Blackfyre wrote: rife_v4.25_heavy - 153 MB
Not sure if something needs to be updated for it to work properly.
Try these for heavy?
Heavy ran first time for me with no issues. It didn't even ask to redo the engine model so I will probably need to make it do that. Removing cached entries doesn't help so I will try your files.
Update
Yes they work thanks. I don't see any difference with v25 in terms of artefacts. I haven't spent enough time to check out smoothness.
unreality wrote:Hello everyone, Can you use SVP + Rife with the Plex Desktop Tool "without using an external player"? I tried with Emby but unfortunately couldn't get it to work.
Chainik wrote:RIFE works everywhere Vapoursynth works - i.e. in every mpv-based player.
@unreality You can use Plex HTPC which is an "mpv-based" player instead of Plex Desktop. It does much of the configuration for you so you don't have to learn how to configure mpv. I stopped using it a while back so I don't know if they have kept up with the latest mpv versions.
Xenocyde wrote:dawkinscm wrote:Rife v2.5 lite is now available for anyone who is interested.
aka 4.25 lite
Thanks
Rife v4.25 lite is now available for anyone who is interested.
flowreen91 wrote:Chainik wrote:BTW: if you just replace vsmlrt.py with the latest git, then it will use V1 models instead of V2
Yes, cause in december 2023 the dev updated the signature of the RIFE method:
https://gyazo.com/bde7edb2b4deb80294dbbaf71b757cc2
but he didn't add it as last element of the method so please fix it by updating helpers.py to send video_player True or False as 10th parameter:
return RIFE(clip,multi,1.0,None,None,None,model_num,backend,ensemble,False,implementation)
or
return RIFE(clip,multi,1.0,None,None,None,model_num,backend,ensemble,True,implementation)
(not sure which one is best for SVP)
Chainik wrote:I'd say this's because of color space converted back and forth, noticeable in a very high contrast areas only.
Probably 
...and your "shaking" is not like Blackfyre's V2 shaking, which is quite obvious not only on those lines but in a whole frame
Yes, i think you're right. I tried to simplify the base.py and generate.js and ended up with this:
https://gyazo.com/5f8efd7ead2c79d6a3afeaa852161184
but micro shaking still persists. Which confirms that it's caused by the color space conversion required for Vapoursynth.
Easiest way to fix it would be to allow Vaporsynth to also apply the same conversion process on the source frame too.
This way all outputed frames should line up and 100% fix the micro-shaking.
Is this possible? (even if it will increase the computational processing needed)
Blackfyre's V2 whole-frame obvious shaking takes priority, though.
Thanks again for putting the time and effort to look through the magnifying glass.
I think False is the best because I remember reading that SVP already performs the same functions as True.
Posts found: 26 to 50 of 425