AMD, Intel and Nvidia driver issues and last recommended version

[chros]

Originally Posted by Manni

... 398.11 ... No idea what broke it. Probably an OS update. In fact I wasn't able to install 385.28 or 398.11 without getting an error from the driver.

Very strange ... Thanks for the explanation!

Now I know (thanks to @SamuriHL's test) that 385.28 (on 1607) is fine as well, as you always told us so.

Can you do 1 more last test please, if you'll have time for it?
- use madvr pixel shader in "ouput HDR format" with the above posted GotG sample ("master luminance" 0.005/4000 ; maCLL/FALL 577/512)
- set 760 nits at real display peak
- What happens to the metadata values of: maxCLL, maxFall, mastering peak ?

Madshi said, they should be:
- mastering peak: 760
- maxCLL: 760 / 3 = 253
- maxFALL: ???

Thank You!

Originally Posted by SamuriHL

Not sure what you're expecting from this?

That's what I thought, but let's go over to the LG Oled thread.
Thanks for testing!

[SamuriHL]

Originally Posted by chros

Madshi said, they should be:
- mastering peak: 760
- maxCLL: 760 / 3 = 253
- maxFALL: ???

I don't see where they're changed in the OSD. I simply see:

master luminance: 0.005/4000
MaxCLL/FALL 577/512

So I doin't know if that's what you're looking for.

[littleD]

Added Support for YUV420 on Display Port for10thGen Intel Core processors with Iris Plus graphics

They have ment probably Y′CBCR 4:2:0

[chros]

Originally Posted by SamuriHL

I don't see where they're changed in the OSD. I simply see:

master luminance: 0.005/4000
MaxCLL/FALL 577/512

These are the input metadata values on the OSD, but I'm curious the GPU output values when "ouput HDR format" is used, that's why we need @Manni's help.

[SamuriHL]

Yea I have no way of testing that at all.

[Manni]

Originally Posted by chros

These are the input metadata values on the OSD, but I'm curious the GPU output values when "ouput HDR format" is used, that's why we need @Manni's help.

Alright then. But no more!

https://imgur.com/nnidZMv

You get the HD Fury Maestro input at the bottom and the JVC input at the top right (they agree).

So you don't need me or an HD Fury, just a recent JVC (or Oppo 203) owner with madVR

[SamuriHL]

Are you blatantly trying to suggest that madvr is doing the right thing?! :P How dare you insinuate madvr is top notch software!! LOL I had very little doubt that'd be the case. It also means our drivers are finally working correctly, as well. Can't say the same for the LG but hey can't win em all.

[huhn]

every end device could provide detail information about the stream the list is nearly for sure far longer then these to two.
and this isn't over HLG will take of soon.

[Manni]

Originally Posted by SamuriHL

Are you blatantly trying to suggest that madvr is doing the right thing?! :P How dare you insinuate madvr is top notch software!! LOL I had very little doubt that'd be the case. It also means our drivers are finally working correctly, as well. Can't say the same for the LG but hey can't win em all.

There might be bug in madVR with [correction: pixel shader outputting HDR, not HDR passthrough] though: it shouldn’t raise maxCLL when it’s lower than peak brightness the way it does, because I don’t see any reason why it should go up. It should keep it at 577 instead of replacing it with the target. Only maxFALL should change in that case. It’s only if the target is lower than maxCLL that maxCLL should be lowered to the target.

Maybe madshi is doing this because he doesn’t trust the metadata, even when present and apparently valid, but it could give worst results with static tonemapping if the metadata is valid, because the display is expecting pixels above 577 when there are none. In this case, the difference is minimal, but with Blade Runner 2019 which has barely any pixel above 100nits (forgot what the metadata says, maybe around 200nits), it would be more significant.

[SamuriHL]

Don't use static tone mapping then? No that could be problematic if that's the case. Hopefully madshi can find a way to fix it if it's truly a bug.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Manni]

Originally Posted by SamuriHL

Don't use static tone mapping then? No that could be problematic if that's the case. Hopefully madshi can find a way to fix it if it's truly a bug.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I never use static tonemapping or HDR passthrough except to run brief tests, but many displays do.

I only did this because of Chros' request.

It's not difficult to fix if it's a bug, madshi just needs to check and only replace maxCLL with target if maxCLL > real peak (760 in this example), and let it alone if maxCLL < real peak.

[chros]

Originally Posted by Manni

Alright then. But no more!

Thank You!

Originally Posted by Manni

So you don't need me or an HD Fury, just a recent JVC (or Oppo 203) owner with madVR

Hmmm, good to know.

Is anybody here with the mentioned devices? (apart from Manni of course )

Originally Posted by SamuriHL

Can't say the same for the LG but hey can't win em all.

Not at all, I'll comment the LG thread as well ...

Originally Posted by Manni

There might be bug in madVR with HDR passthrough though

Probably you meant "output in HDR format" (and not passthrough).
Good point! I missed this on your image

Originally Posted by Manni

it could give worst results with static tonemapping if the metadata is valid, because the display is expecting pixels above 577 when there are none. In this case, the difference is minimal, but with Blade Runner 2019 which has barely any pixel above 100nits (forgot what the metadata says, maybe around 200nits), it would be more significant.

Blade runner is a good example, I think maxCLL was around 120 nits!

[Manni]

Originally Posted by chros

Probably you meant "output in HDR format" (and not passthrough).
Good point! I missed this on your image

Yes I did, sorry for the confusion and thanks for the correction, I've edited my post. Of course that's what I used to take the screenshot

BTW I checked and BR2049’s maxCLL is 181.

[SamuriHL]

Originally Posted by Manni

I never use static tonemapping or HDR passthrough except to run brief tests, but many displays do.

I only did this because of Chros' request.

It's not difficult to fix if it's a bug, madshi just needs to check and only replace maxCLL with target if maxCLL > real peak (760 in this example), and let it alone if maxCLL < real peak.

Yea that seems reasonable.

[kostik]

Originally Posted by GTPVHD

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce...-ready-driver/

Nvidia GeForce 440.77 WHQL driver, new driver branch R440, will need a lot of testing.

It also adds support for windowed G-SYNC for OpenGL and Vulkan-based applications

Variable Refresh support for LG C9 TV's.(Needs confirmation / Beta firmware + Turing only)

[SamuriHL]

Man I *JUST* looked about 45 minutes ago for new drivers and didn't see one out there. LOL Cause Windows had to do a full build install of 19h2 and I always reinstall my driver after that. Ok, I guess I'll go grab that and test it tonight.

[ryrynz]

The variable refresh can work with other untested displays as well.

[huhn]

they added free sync support over HDMI they are just trying to rename it to g-sync compatible with great success.

[nevcairiel]

Originally Posted by huhn

they added free sync support over HDMI they are just trying to rename it to g-sync compatible with great success.

They added HDMI VRR support. FreeSync is AMDs branding, "GSYNC Compatible" is NVIDIAs.

FreeSync never was the name of any specific technology, its just AMDs branding for either DisplayPort Adaptive Sync, or HDMI Variable Refresh Rate.

[huhn]

screen are getting rebranded right now that.