You are not logged in. Please login or register.
SmoothVideo Project → Using SVP → SVP with AviSynth 2.6 or AviSynth+ ?
MaXimus, regular builds don't support MT which tend to be less stable. Multi-Threading is generally only supported in special builds. SVP requires Multi-Threading to do its job in real-time.
SEt is saying the MT will be there, so there you'll have your better alternative! (finally)
FYI SEt posted his new MT version http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=148782
Main issue with original AVS - it eats too much memory.
I can easily push memory usage beyond 2 GB on 1080p video and it's just one click away from 32-bit process crashing.
Another issue - memory consumption is almost not adjustable in original AVS MT. In both "2.5.8 SVP's edition" and AVS+ memory consumption linearly depends on number of thread in use, BUT original AVS always eats its 2+ GB.
For example:
15 threads (default value for 8-thread CPUs): AVS 2.6 - 2300 MB, AVS 2.5 "SVP" - 1845 MB, AVS+ - 2000 MB.
10 threads: AVS 2.6 - 2000 MB, AVS 2.5 "SVP" - 1310 MB, AVS+ - 1580 MB.
AVS 2.6 will always crash a player unless it's not "4GB patched".
Videos larger than FullHD will not work with AVS 2.6.
Main issue with original AVS - it eats too much memory.
So is it memory leak or a "feature"?
Could someone do a comparison again but with newest Avisynth MT? Does it still fast at the beginning but then slows down because of too much memory when encoding?
James D
So is it memory leak or a "feature"?
a feature 
it just wasting memory for excessive caching
1080p movie:
AS 2.5.8 = +1100MB overall RAM used.
AS 2.6.4 and 2.6.5 = 1700MB each.
Now curious part...
4K H.263 4mn 2s Bit rate 51.0 Mbps 3840x2160 pixels Frame rate Constant 29.970 fps
This video + AS 2.6.5 = +1.55GB RAM.
I need an h264 now to test
Even more curious:
Codec ID: avc1 Codec ID/Info: Advanced Video Coding Duration: 3mn 46s
Bit rate: 22.5 Mbps Maximum bit rate: 58.1 Mbps
Width: 4 096 pixels Height: 2 304 pixels Frame rate: Constant 24.000 fps
This video + AS 2.6.5 = +1.985 MB RAM.
Sorry but to me it looks like there are personal reasons for not to use it.
As a USER I can say that crash when searching feels like Big bug. While having to patch smth with 4GB Patch feels like Developers successfully fight with natural limitations and support product and customers. Just my 2 cents;)
Chainik
Another issue - memory consumption is almost not adjustable in original AVS MT. In both "2.5.8 SVP's edition" and AVS+ memory consumption linearly depends on number of thread in use, BUT original AVS always eats its 2+ GB.
<...>
it just wasting memory for excessive caching
Is it hard to make "2.6MT SVP's edition"?
With the 4GB patch, you could advertise SVP's ability to "finally make your 8GB RAM useful" as a feature!
nemoW
Is it hard to make "2.6MT SVP's edition"?
may be this's the only option right now
Just for the record, how many computation threads are needed for the maximum performance.
Graph shows how frames-per-second depend on number of MT threads.
AVS script is SVP-generated for frame doubling (x2) with GPU acceleration.
CPU is AMD FX-8350 (4 cores 8 threads, just like Core i7).
And every thread need its memory and increases inner AVS cache.
avs-mt.png 7.24 kb, 503 downloads since 2015-01-30
I'd be curious as to how the previous 2.6 MT compares in performance.
But I guess the point is that performance doesn't change much, all that changes is the number of threads required, which doesn't change the number of threads that actually get created (I think 15 by default on GPU+8 CPU?)
Mystery
I'd be curious as to how the previous 2.6 MT compares in performance.
SEt's MT patch was last changed in early 2011...
number of threads required, which doesn't change the number of threads that actually get created
Right. This's why I'm starting to think we could switch to SEt's 2.6 MT.
It's totally OK on systems with 8 GB memory.
BUT it can create problems on 4 GB memory AND make SVP almost unusable on less than 4 GB memory.
Mystery
performance doesn't change much, all that changes is the number of threads required, which doesn't change the number of threads that actually get created
Man, that is some logical point that I didn't think about. Are you a lawer?)
The question is... what performance difference on 15 threads?
I believe that different avisynths require optimized plugins for optimal performance.
Options in installer: SVP AS2.5 Ready or 2.6 Ready. Select checkbox.
James D
Options in installer: SVP AS2.5 Ready or 2.6 Ready
try to guess how many users will know the right answer
Man, that is some logical point that I didn't think about. Are you a lawer?)
No, a computer programmer (in past life, now running my own business in a different field).
The question is... what performance difference on 15 threads?
I would love to see that as well.
James D
Options in installer: SVP AS2.5 Ready or 2.6 Readytry to guess how many users will know the right answer
I was thinking about that as being ideal. Write it out simply: select 2.6 MT if you have at least 4GB of RAM (more stable but takes more memory). Otherwise, select 2.5 MT.
If they're still confused, program it to auto-detect the amount of RAM and select the right option by default.
Mystery
what performance difference on 15 threads? ... I would love to see that as well.
the same
BTW I was able to build AVS 2.6 + MT + our own patches, and it almost working BUT they've changed something in caching algorithm so it eats memory really fast and crashes.
And I really don't like to dig into this ... crap one more time
So I'd prefer to stick with "official" build if it's possible.
I hate digging into crappy code. Most programmers code like crap and leave a bunch of small issues behind that compound on each other to make a "functional mess". This is certainly the case with AviSynth.
Rule #1 with this: if it's not broken don't touch it
Chainik, if performance is the same, SVP patch wouldn't change performance but only memory usage? For computers with 4-8GB RAM, the 500-1000MB you might save won't change much. For computers with less than 4GB, they're better off with the 2.5 MT version.
What patching the 2.6 MT might do is to allow weaker computers to also run the 2.6 MT version.
Perhaps applying the 4GB patch would be good too. But... mmm... that patches the executables? AviSynth.dll is a DLL, it is the processes accessing it that would have to be patched... yeah that won't work.
"4gb patch" is a must in any case.
perhaps this should be written with big and bold red letters on every Wiki page
but then can you patch AviSynth.dll, or you would have to patch MPC-HC, x264, MeGUI and every other application that uses AviSynth?
Oh. In this case it's only SvpMgr.exe that needs to be patched. MPC-HC isn't using AviSynth. SvpMgr is. Maybe?
ffdshow is using avisynth
video player is using ffdshow
Chainik
ffdshow is using avisynth
video player is using ffdshow
Sorry, I still can not figure out which files need to be patched: avisynth.dll and mpc-hc.exe or something else?
.exe file only
I had to patch player's exe in the first 2 days after using SVP and never heared about Avs 2.6 by that time.
P.S. Reading your words some people may be confused so that they will try to patch ffdshow.exe.
P.P.S. I would be fine with any Avs if I get no bug.
Since you embed MPC-HC into SVP's package, you can have it patched.
SmoothVideo Project → Using SVP → SVP with AviSynth 2.6 or AviSynth+ ?
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.