• Thanks: 1

Topic: Which system to build

I am currently considering building a new computer. Since I often use SVP to interpolate movies with RIFE, I would like to have a system that can do that a bit faster than my current computer.
I also regularly use Topaz video AI to improve image quality before interpolating. There is a community for this where benchmarks are shared which allows you to estimate in advance the performance of a particular system. The new amd 9070xt does amazingly well, around the same level as the nvidia 5080.

I know RIFE is mainly optimized for Nvidia. However, I lack more precise data to determine which GPU would be the right one for me. I wouldn't mind saving up for the 5080 if it can transcode much faster than the 9070xt, or if it can interpolate 4k videos live, for example. However, I am currently a bit in the dark in this area as to what the concrete differences are.

Is there anyone who has either GPU who can share some numbers? For example number of FPS when transcoding a 1080p file? Or anyone who has a 5080 and can confirm that 4k HDR files can be interpolated live?

  • Thanks: 8

Re: Which system to build

Hi there,

what is your current computer as a reference point?
MPC HC? MPV? Other?
Performance also depends on desired quality and type of movies (anime, sport, TV series).
Different types of movies and different RIFE models.

There are a lot of variables so I would not expect exact answer.

Personally, I started using SVP with MPC HC and MadVR to get good colors.
MadVR is quite demanding, even on AMD 7950X3D and RTX 4070 Super.
Once I changed from "regular" 4K LCD to high-end 10-bit HDR one, I got rid of MadVR and happy with MPC HC and it's internal rendered - super quality with 4K/HDR sources.
1920x1080 / 25FPS to 4K / 60 FPS, RIFE v2 25 or 26 playing live is doable.
Watching Formula 1 and Voleyball, both are fast moving scenes.

Just compared with Topaz.
With my settings, it takes about 10 times of movies duration to enhance from 25 FPS to 60 FPS with 10x larger file while retaining 1920x1080 resolution.
Basically, overnight job both for GPU and CPU to watch a 2-hours sport next day.
On the other hand, there are definitely less artifacts and I can easily upscale to 4K with passive mode on GPU when playing.
Also, seeking with pre-computed file is smooth.
So, viewer experience is much better...if oyu can wait and burn PC for 10 hours.

I will try to transcode using SVP before watching to get a comparation later...

  • Thanks: 1

Re: Which system to build

My current computer is a 6700xt GPU and Ryzen 5 5600 CPU. Transcoding of 1080p files with rife 4.22 lite is at a pace of about 34fps.
I know there are many variables, but a general benchmark would be quite useful.

I would love to be able to use madvr and SVP for 4k hdr files, but I guess only a 5090 GPU would be able to do this.
I use a projector (Sony xw5000), so external HDR tone mapping (and frame interpolation) make a huge difference...

Topaz I only use for enhancements, never interpolation.

  • Thanks: 8

Re: Which system to build

Nice projector.

Once I calibrated my LCD (and there are color profiles as well), I got rid of MadVR.
There is a performance hit with MadVR and if your HW is capable of dealing with color profiles and/or calibration, I would go hardware way.

Then, you can go 1080p files to 4K / 60 FPS even on RTX 4070.

Can't tell about AMD GPUs, I will let others to answer that or seach the forum.

  • Thanks: 1

Re: Which system to build

The projector is calibrated, but HDR wise, tonemapping through madvr is way better than when the projector is handling this...

6 Reply by dawkinscm (edited by dawkinscm 12-08-2025 07:17:49)

Re: Which system to build

Honza wrote:

Hi there,
I will try to transcode using SVP before watching to get a comparation later...

Did you do the Rife 4.25 vs Topaz comparison?

  • Thanks: 8
  • Thanks for the post: 1

Re: Which system to build

dawkinscm wrote:

Did you do the Rife 4.25 vs Topaz comparison?

Yes, I did.
Topaz 7.x with "Chronos fast" model seems to give best performace vs quality for Full HD 25 to 60 FPS conversion.
On my specs, it takes about 2x time of input video, with same output resolution.
Converting to native LCD FPS is primary benefit. Resolution is not so important because HW upscaling is doing good enough job, it makes processing time much slower and final file much larger.
Very user friendly, usually works out of the box, price is a bit higher but final quality is better.
It can do motion deblur, stabilization etc, which is more HW demanding (and out of reach for live playback on current high-end GPUs).

If I want to go for quality, Topaz is the way. Or preparing video so I can play it somewhere else without relevant GPU for SVP.
SVP can play on the fly, which I consider it's main benefit and best choice for overall usage.
So I use both.

I have noticed some remarks that those doing RIFE models are now interested in other stuff so not sure if we will see any newer RIFE models soon.
Perhaps I may be wrong.

There is other exiting stuff, kind of exploring future ways of enhancing videos.
Topaz released it's Starlight Mini model, which is diffusion model for video upscaling, locally rendered if you have relevant HW (HUGE GPU with a LOT of VRAM). It is kind of next level.
Those can keep even NVIDIA GPU Baseboard 4 H200 busy for a while, I guess.

Experimenting with ComfyUI.
A node-based application for generative AI is different aproach and video frame interpolation is only part of it.
It is open source, hence free and with all negatives of it - not working straight away, compatability issues with tons of modules, Python versions etc.
And usually painfully slow.

Found interesting paper called "A Survey on Future Frame Synthesis: Bridging Deterministic and Generative Approaches".

Re: Which system to build

Honza wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:

Did you do the Rife 4.25 vs Topaz comparison?

Yes, I did.
Topaz 7.x with "Chronos fast" model seems to give best performace vs quality for Full HD 25 to 60 FPS conversion.
On my specs, it takes about 2x time of input video, with same output resolution.
Converting to native LCD FPS is primary benefit. Resolution is not so important because HW upscaling is doing good enough job, it makes processing time much slower and final file much larger.
Very user friendly, usually works out of the box, price is a bit higher but final quality is better.
It can do motion deblur, stabilization etc, which is more HW demanding (and out of reach for live playback on current high-end GPUs).

If I want to go for quality, Topaz is the way.

This was the impression I got when reading about Topaz vs SVP but that last post gave me pause for thought. I've noticed recently that the better the picture quality the better Rife looks. This doesn't quite make sense to me. It may just be a function of a more stable picture. Rife v4.25 is very smooth and does a good enough job at reducing artifacts. I'm still experimenting but I always go back to v4.25.

  • Thanks: 8

Re: Which system to build

dawkinscm wrote:

This was the impression I got when reading about Topaz vs SVP but that last post gave me pause for thought. I've noticed recently that the better the picture quality the better Rife looks. This doesn't quite make sense to me. It may just be a function of a more stable picture. Rife v4.25 is very smooth and does a good enough job at reducing artifacts. I'm still experimenting but I always go back to v4.25.

4.25 v2 is best for movies, I think.
4.25 v2 lite not, heavy is not working, 4.26 v2 heavy is the worst.

It may be good for regular movies, but not sports.
Typical challenge is boxes with timing, score etc and camera rolling when following a movement.
Boxes are bouncing, moving around, getting distorted, it is very unpleasant.

10 Reply by dawkinscm (edited by dawkinscm 13-08-2025 19:31:13)

  • Thanks: 216
  • Thanks for the post: 1

Re: Which system to build

Honza wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:

This was the impression I got when reading about Topaz vs SVP but that last post gave me pause for thought. I've noticed recently that the better the picture quality the better Rife looks. This doesn't quite make sense to me. It may just be a function of a more stable picture. Rife v4.25 is very smooth and does a good enough job at reducing artifacts. I'm still experimenting but I always go back to v4.25.

4.25 v2 is best for movies, I think.
4.25 v2 lite not, heavy is not working, 4.26 v2 heavy is the worst.

It may be good for regular movies, but not sports.
Typical challenge is boxes with timing, score etc and camera rolling when following a movement.
Boxes are bouncing, moving around, getting distorted, it is very unpleasant.

v2 is no longer needed according to the devs as there is no longer any advantage to using it which his true except maybe for GPU usage. I've just tried it for the first time in a while and it reduces my GPU load by at least 10% so unless I see some extra artifacts I'm going to stick with that. 4.25 is the best but also the most GPU intensive. 4.25 heavy and 4.26 heavy struggle to play my 4k content. But I remember them not being great anyway.