Search options (Page 5 of 10)

@RickyAstle98

Also when RIFE will support new computation levels directly from RT chain, thats increase inference performance from 84 to 100% according to NVIDIA guys!

That was a joke?
Or was something like that stated by the RIFE developers? They would have to make use of the new features.

The 5090 will have 2x as much CUDA cores than 5080, less power consumption on new compute levels! The 5080 performance is between 4080 and 4090 in rendering tasks, but games? Who knows?!

Correct.
Simply two BW-103 GPU-dies glued together (as Apple is doing with their M1 architecture since 2020 and Nvidia with Blackwell ML).
Of course (given technical leaks) Nvidias milking-strategy will be again, to castrate all GPU-dies of each model of their lineup (by 10 - 15 % as usually), as there is no competition and AMD+Nvidia is an Stackelberg-duopoly anyway for some years. Both companies are both manipulating the market for years, colluding on prices and products etc. There is no real competition; it's a public farce.
The currenlty sold RTX 4080 (super) are in fact relabeled RTX 4070 (AD104 GPU-die). The firstly introduced "RTX 4080 12GB" - which was then canceled - was in fact a RTX 4060 (AD-106 GPU-die).
There is no real RTX 4080 sold; same for rtx 4070 (is a rtx 4060 in fact) and the rtx 4060 (is a rtx 4050 in fact).
Renaming SKUs, giving them lower tier GPU-dies.
Looking at the leaks, it will be the same for consumer rtx 5000 again.

@dawkinscm

If the rumours are true then the 5080 doesn't suck because it will be at least as powerful as the current most powerful consumer GPU on the planet

As mentioned, that will verly likely (if the leaks are true) not happening. Also: don't generalize the metrics.
At best a rtx 5080 (BW-103 GPU- die, so in fact a relabeled RTX 5070), will have 15 - 20 % less rasterization performance than a rtx 4090. In reality it should be more of +25  less%. Similar story with Tensor Cores (for RIFE) and other things.

1) The leaked BW-103 GPU-die (RTX 5080), has a whopping ~ 60 % less shading units, ROPs, RT-Cores, or TMUs, Tensor Cores than the GPU in the current RTX 4090, but should somehow magically achieve the same rasterization performance, machine learning, ray tracing or Tensor Core (for RIFE) performance? This is not happening. The last time there was this huge of GPU-architecture jump of > 50 % from Nvidia, was last in 2007 from the 8 series. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_8_series
As said: Ampere rtx 3090 to 4090 is only so big because of the lithography 12 nm -> 5 nm jump. Two full nodes.
Performance jumps due to GPU-architecture from Nvidia, were all only 10 - 20 % for the last 5 generations. The rest was lithography or simply more transistors.
2) The leaks specifies only the full BW-103 GPu-die for the rtx 5080 (GPU SM 84 (84 Full)). Nvidias has never sold a full GPU-die for consumers, for the last 4 - 5 generations or so. It will be castrated by at least 10 % as usual, just as every other model.
So it won't be 84 SM, but more like ~ 76 again, which means 70 % less units than the current rtx 4090.
3) Moores Law is effectively dead since 2012 TSMC's 28 nm lithography node (whatever other people say is wrong, or lying marketing).
4) For many generations (2012, especially since CUDA) Nvidia's pro/quadro/server and consumer lineup, have the same GPU architecture basis. They only swap out/leave out certain components as display output, video accelerators etc.
TMU, ROP, Tensor Core, RT Cores are verly much alike.
AMD's leading people, finally realized that this unified approach is the smarter way and will soon start doing the same
https://overclock3d.net/news/gpu-displa … nd-gamers/
4) GH100 to B100 has only 30 % overall more transistors (Hopper to Blackwell architecture). Together with the previous things mentioned, this is a leak in itself, already giving away how much better Nvidias engineer can make the RTX 5000 lineup, comparing equal GPU-die to GPU-die.
20 - 30 % in all aspects. The rest will be ML ("AI") marketing-gimmicks as "fake frames" Frame Generation x-4 times, or DLSS 4.

So anyone pondering about buying a graphics card for RIFE for usage of 3840x1600 or 4K-UHD (3840x2160): Either continue with the rtx 4090 or grab upcoming rtx 5090. Sorry to "burst some bubbles".
It's all a illegal, colluding Stackelberg Duopoly since at least 2006 (Nvidia is here the Stackelberg leader)
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidi … ,6311.html
https://hexus.net/business/news/corpora … itigation/
AMD is not selling "cheaper products for less money" aka offering better price/performance for at least 5 graphic cards generations (since 2014).
The simly price them 10 - 20 % below Nvidia's graphics card models (e.g. current rtx 7900xtx versus rtx 4080), but are worse 50 - 200 % in nearly all aspects (efficacy, features as image reconstruction DLSS 3 vs. FSR 2, raytracing or ML-performance, streaming etc.).
Hardly anyone uses a AMD RDNA 1,2,3 graphics card for RIFE, with via ncnn/Vulkan, right? It sucks in performance.

Same goes for Intel+AMD duopoly, controlling the consumer and server market, with their x86/x64 patents for decades, eliminating any real competition.
All company execs only want to maximize product margin to the moon, and please financial shareholders.
The stuff about "fair and legal competition" based on capitalistic markets doctrine and laws, is a lie and a public farce for at least 10 -20 years.
It's all an elaborated show, but 99 % of the media continues to report as if there were some real, fair and legal competition going on ...

Sorry a bit for the offtopic part. I think it has to be commented, especially since hardly anyone mentions it in the current state of nonsense 08/15-media brainwashing.

Blackfyre wrote:

@jdg4dfv7

Thanks for all the info, I'll read all of it in detail later, but I skimmed through it and wanted to note that the 4.26 model definitely showed heavy artifacts in certain scenes I tested that were not present in 4.18 and 4.25. I gave the No Time to Die example before, but I noticed it elsewhere too. Maybe I will test again and see how it goes.

Another thing I wanted to note is 3840x1600 is what I call 4K letterbox, but there are a lot of IMAX releases too for the past few years, which are actual full scale 4K (or switch to it in many scenes), this also applies to some TV shows that are full scale 4K and not limited to 1600 vertical pixels.

This is why I use 4.25 v2 for 3840x1600 or lower at x2, and I use 4.16 v2 for full 4K at x2

3090 is only capable of pushing x2 and v2 models perform better than v1

The 5080 news sucks, but I am hoping the 5090 is not ridiculously priced in Australia (but it looks like it will, and I might just stick with the 3090 until it dies out now if the performance difference to the 4090 is not substantial).

If the rumours are true then the 5080 doesn't suck because it will be at least as powerful as the current most powerful consumer GPU on the planet and that would be good enough for me. But if the rumours are true then the 5090 will be so far ahead of it in performance that it will feel like the 5080 sucks.

RickyAstle98 wrote:

dlr5668 wrote:

You can edit source scripts in SVP folder. Not many have 240 hz OLED for it to be useful

The OLED? The BFI still benefits for any panel types, my chinese 180Hz IPS
How to edit source script to make every other frame black? thanks!

Even SVP dev cant do it in 1 try. Dump SVP 4\script into chatgpt/claude and start debugging until you get it right or bored. Thats how I would start

RickyAstle98 wrote:

Whats the default align/valign values for SVP4 Pro? I forgot that I used 2x2 all the time, maybe thats why all models starting 4.16 looks fragmentary smooth!

Fragmentary smooth - when a small parts of one large object can be interpolated differently, even being a same large object! For example: faces, 4.4 to 4.16 faces looks buttery smooth, from 4.17 to 4.26 small parts like lips, cheeks, ears and other objects can be separated from the frame! There were cases when the lips moved apart alone, never happens for 4.4 to 4.16 before, also happens when the main object in the frame is interpolated correctly, but all the background moving both axis, looks like one step forward-two steps back frame!

The 4.26 new model is worse than 4.15 lite in Matrix rooftop 3 agents opening the doors, pattern errors on door textures, no door errors in 4.15v2 (both mod32 and mod64 input)!

Too noticeable door errors 4.4 (worst)
Less noticeable door errors 4.9 (okay)
No door errors 4.11 to 4.16 (perfect)

For testing what you stated, can you provide or indicate the exact scene.thanks

flowreen91 wrote:

aloola wrote:

v15.2 gives me a tiny FPS boost
v14test3 ~150fps vs ~ v15.2 ~158fps, also fixed dynamic shape (Performance boost: off) bug

15.2 changelog:

    Upgraded to TensorRT 10.3.0.

    Fixed performance regression of RIFE and SAFA models starting with vs-mlrt v14.test4. This version may still be slightly slower than vs-mlrt v14.test3 under some conditions, however.

Looking forward to @aloola benchmarks for the new TensorRT like he did before:
https://www.svp-team.com/forum/viewtopi … 324#p84324

As he said above, on average he got around an 8 fps improvement. But this stat should be taken in the context of dev notes that suggest there might be be specific situations where the performance might be slightly worse.

dawkinscm wrote:

Rife v4.20 has been released. I didn't do a large amount of testing but I did check the few remaining artefacts I know of and there doesn't seem to be a clear  difference to v4.15/v4.18 on my system.

Update: Apparently v4.20 is great when using 16x interpolation with Anime. I would be interested to hear if that is helpful for anyone.

Massive difference in size! wow hopefully I can run 4K 2x with a 3090, but I highly doubt it. Usually I have to wait for the Lite v2, but even then, not all of them can run.

Guys, do I need to disable hwdec=auto-copy in config? MPV got updated and it reset my config file.

Chainik wrote:

SVP 4.6.0.272

1. added motion vectors-based scene change detection for RIFE
2. configurable "decrease to..." function (on the "Frame size" page) - selectable target resolution and downscaling filter

Thanks for the update. I decided to completely reinstall everything to remove any changes I made. The results so far are that
- SVOP and Image Comparison and disabled give very similar results.
- NVOF might be a little worse overall but still similar.
- This is the same as before except that all of them feel a little less smooth than the previous setup with SC set to 100.
- Setting SC to 100 with this new software seems to be similar to the others as well. Although when I add back the MVP interpolation code that helps. I also put back the TensorRT9.2 files.

Let's see what others say.