madVR - high quality video renderer (GPU assisted)

[JarrettH]

How about Jinc AR + SuperRes (1-2) vs NGU low and med with catmull downscaling on real content?

I can't run NGU on my 550 Ti, but I can do the other. Curious as to what I'm missing. SuperRes with Jinc is more satisfactory to me than sxbr doubling.

[Thunderbolt8]

do I see this correctly that NGU is some kind of image doubling algorithm, but no normal upscaler? at least I cannot seem to choose it from the upscaling algorithms tab.

[JarrettH]

Originally Posted by Thunderbolt8

do I see this correctly that NGU is some kind of image doubling algorithm, but no normal upscaler? at least I cannot seem to choose it from the upscaling algorithms tab.

Yeah, I think the doubling implementation is becoming more important now with 1440p and 4k monitors

[theDongerr]

Hey new to the forum here and not sure where to start. Basically I'm running an R9 280 dual-x and pretty content with super-xbr 100 + SR 3 for upscaling 1080p24 -> 2160p24. I have been thinking about upgrading my GPU to take advantage of NNEDI3 or NGU. Will a GTX 1080 pretty much allow me to get the most of NNEDI3 and NGU for the purposes of doubling the 1080p image? I'm using uncompressed BD rips using MakeMKV.

I was originally looking at an asus gtx 1080 ROG strix card... seems like there are so many different flavors our there. Are there any that the board recommends?

[ispano]

NGU Feedback

Been testing NGU over the weekend on my RX 480. Rendertimes appear to be in line with what I expected and I'm sure it will see speed improvements along the way. As a metric, I can render NGU high >> luma doubling only >> 1080p to 4k @ under 41.7ms for film content. Driver is 16.11.4 clocked at 1425mhz and 2100mhz mem. NGU is a good middle ground for those who want the sharpness of xbr and the more "natural" look of NNEDI3. It's not a replacement for either IMO. There's also very noticeable aliasing that occurs when the dehalo algo is enabled in the artifact removal section. It's possible that NGU is already doing a lot of preprocessing so it's best to minimize as much filtering as possible.

1) Do we still need NNEDI3 image doubling? Or can NGU completely replace it?
Both XBR and NNEDI3 should never be an option for removal. They are "tried and true" so to speak from various other applications. NNEDI3 has been my reference since it's inception in avisynth. I like madvr because of its ability to provide a multitude of options. Each individual can find a configuration that works for them as well as their hardware.

2) Do we still need SuperRes (image doubling)? Or can NGU completely replace it?
SuperRes should stay. I think it works great for image upscalers like Jinc. Hardware requirements are far less with a good upscaler + SuperRes versus Image Doubling for resolutions like 1440p.

3) Do we still need NEDI image doubling?
If you absolutely had to clean house, then NEDI is the only candidate for removal. I personally prefer using it for 60fps with SR. It provides similar qualities to NNEDI3 but without the performance cost.

Finally thx for all your hard work Madshi and the great community feedback.

Side Note: Hardware Accelerated HDR playback works great on the RX 480. Must have been a driver issue with DXVA copy-back on initial release. Being able to use HDR made 3DLUT's from DisplayCal is a favorite addition of mine.

[Sp00kyFox]

tested a little bit more with NGU. very good job madshi, I'm pretty impressed with it. here is another comparsion:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/191345

[madshi]

Originally Posted by Smithy

can we use the add grain option @ Jinc upscaling or other scalers in next version or later ?

Maybe.

Originally Posted by JarrettH

How about Jinc AR + SuperRes (1-2) vs NGU low and med with catmull downscaling on real content?

I can't run NGU on my 550 Ti, but I can do the other. Curious as to what I'm missing. SuperRes with Jinc is more satisfactory to me than sxbr doubling.

You're likely missing something. Make sure to disable chroma doubling and to pick catrom "image upscaling" to make "NGU-Low" fast. I'm not sure how often I have to say that. I think I've given this advice about 5 times on the last 2 pages...

Originally Posted by theDongerr

Hey new to the forum here and not sure where to start. Basically I'm running an R9 280 dual-x and pretty content with super-xbr 100 + SR 3 for upscaling 1080p24 -> 2160p24. I have been thinking about upgrading my GPU to take advantage of NNEDI3 or NGU. Will a GTX 1080 pretty much allow me to get the most of NNEDI3 and NGU for the purposes of doubling the 1080p image? I'm using uncompressed BD rips using MakeMKV.

Your R9 280 might already be able to do "NGU-low" doubling with 1080p24 sources, just give it a try. Make sure you choose the other settings correctly. I'm not going to repeat them *another* time (see above).

[madshi]

Originally Posted by ispano

Been testing NGU over the weekend on my RX 480. Rendertimes appear to be in line with what I expected and I'm sure it will see speed improvements along the way. As a metric, I can render NGU high >> luma doubling only >> 1080p to 4k @ under 41.7ms for film content.

Interesting! That seems to be much faster than what huhn is getting with his RX 480?

Originally Posted by ispano

There's also very noticeable aliasing that occurs when the dehalo algo is enabled in the artifact removal section.

NGU already has a dehalo effect on its own, so I'd recommend to disable the separate dehalo option when using NGU.

Originally Posted by ispano

SuperRes should stay. I think it works great for image upscalers like Jinc. Hardware requirements are far less with a good upscaler + SuperRes versus Image Doubling for resolutions like 1440p.

Have you tested "NGU-Low" with the recommended configuration for fast image doubling (see above, I posted this several times in the last 2 pages)? It's faster for me than Jinc+SuperRes!!

Originally Posted by Sp00kyFox

tested a little bit more with NGU. very good job madshi, I'm pretty impressed with it.

Glad you like it!

[JarrettH]

Originally Posted by madshi

You're likely missing something. Make sure to disable chroma doubling and to pick catrom "image upscaling" to make "NGU-Low" fast. I'm not sure how often I have to say that. I think I've given this advice about 5 times on the last 2 pages...

No, sorry, I thought it was because I am using a 3D Lut and didn't mention that variable. Earlier I could swear the settings were linked and couldn't disable chroma.

Why does choosing catmull under image upscaling effect the speed? I thought that isn't used with doubling. I'm going 720p to 1080p

[MariaX9]

Here a couple of Numbers:

Chroma Upscaling: NGU High
Image downscaling: SIMM1D
Image doubling: luma and chroma NGU High
Image upscaling: Jinc
Render Time: 35s

Chroma Upscaling: NGU High
Image downscaling: SiSIMM1D
Image doubling: luma only NGU High
Image upscaling: Jinc
Render Time: 20s

Chroma Upscaling: NGU Medium
Image downscaling: SIMM1D
Image doubling: luma and chroma NGU Medium
Image upscaling: Jinc
Render Time: 17s

Chroma Upscaling: NGU Medium
Image downscaling: SIMM1D
Image doubling: luma only NGU Medium
Image upscaling: Jinc
Render Time: 12s

Chroma Upscaling: NGU Medium
Image downscaling: SIMM1D
Image doubling: luma and chroma NGU High
Image upscaling: Jinc
Render Time: 31s

Chroma Upscaling: NGU Medium
Image downscaling: SIMM1D
Image doubling: luma only NGU High
Image upscaling: Jinc
Render Time: 12s

Chroma Upscaling: NNEDI 64
Image downscaling: SIMM1D
Image doubling: luma only NNEDI 64
Image upscaling: Junc
Render Time: 22s

Chroma Upscaling: NNEDI 64
Image downscaling: SIMM1D
Image doubling: luma and chroma NNEDI 64
Image upscaling: Jinc
Render Time: 38s

Chroma Upscaling: super-XBR
Image downscaling: SIMM1D
Image doubling: luma and chroma super-XBR
Image upscaling: Jinc
Render Time: 6s

[fedpul]

Hi, I would like to share a comparison between some chroma upscalers: http://imgur.com/a/JSJBn

NGU looks too sharp and in some way it changes the brightness and other things, you can see how the pink stripes in the needle look thicker with NGU.

I will be doing render times comparison with 3 different movies. 480p24, 720p24 and 1080p24 with different doubling algos and bring it here in XLS format or plain text as you prefer.

Sorry for my late answer, I was very busy and did not have time to reply some things mashi and others told me.

[JarrettH]

Jinc with SR2 vs NGU low

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/191350 (eh, not a great capture to use)

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/191351

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/191355

What do you think, madshi?

What I see are the same details with less overall coarseness which SuperRes tends to bring out, and contrasting edges draw less attention to themselves

Is NGU low a better doubler than super-xbr? I'm curious to know more What are the technical differences between low, med, and high? Is each setting the same sharpness?

[Warner306]

Just watching something now. Figured out how to use NGU medium quality at 720p -> 1080p.

Is NGU too sharp to anyone else? Maybe soften edges is a mandatory requirement?

[theDongerr]

Is there a preferred gtx 1080 card?

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[Sunspark]

Originally Posted by fedpul

Hi, I would like to share a comparison between some chroma upscalers: http://imgur.com/a/JSJBn
NGU looks too sharp and in some way it changes the brightness and other things, you can see how the pink stripes in the needle look thicker with NGU.

I know what you mean.. I've been using bicubic 60 AR awhile for chroma on my intel hd 6000 gpu.. I find that primary colours, especially red, yellow too, are more saturated with it. Most noticable on anime, and video scenes that have pale reds present. Everyone here likes superxbr, but I find that it doesn't have the same richness of colour. The difference is subtle, you likely wouldn't notice it if one wasn't looking for it, except I was able to notice the difference on an relatively uncalibrated TN monitor. If you like, try that exact scene with bicubic 60 AR, I'd be curious to see how it looks.

[Sunspark]

@madshi

Hi, I am sorry I am late sending the log file to you. In the summer I had said that aspect ratio scaling seemed to select different values. Monitor's native resolution is 2048x1152 which is 16:9. Using a sample video it starts at 21:9 default aspect. Manually changing it to 235:100 changes it to 2.35:1 by extending the vertical slightly and circles looks more proportionate as a result compared to the initial setting. Some other files, e.g. tv, also have this aspect scaling subtly off, 16:9 v.s. 1.85 or some other number. In this file I started the video twice using both settings. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...%20-%20log.zip

[Anima123]

I am glad to find that NGU low can be used to playback 576p -> 1080p with the old 640m. It is still slower than SuperXBR though, NGU low 22 ms while SuperXBR 16.6 ms.

The NGU low is more sharp and artifacts free than SuperXBR so a little bit more demanding is worth it.

Edit: Of course it would be great if NGU low can be further optimized to be in parallel the computing level of SuerXBR, if possible.

[Warner306]

Yes, I definitely prefer NGU with soften edges turned on. Cartoon is the word to describe it when left off. I didn't know too sharp was possible.

[Warner306]

@madshi

Is it possible to post a detailed description of NGU and what it does, similar to this post on NNEDI3:

Demonstration of NNEDI3 Image Doubling

Of course, I'd like to link to it.

[Sunset1982]

Originally Posted by theDongerr

Is there a preferred gtx 1080 card?

Good card come from MSI, ASUS or Palit. If you have enough room in your case I would go for MSI. They got a silent cooling solution.



@madhi:

Do you have any idea what causes the bad performance of NGU with RX480 cards? Driver issue or anytrhing other?


Any idea how to fix it? Is there anything I could do to help you find out?