Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Hardware & Software > Software players

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 22nd February 2014, 13:02   #23661  |  Link
annovif
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Italy
Posts: 41
I'm sorry but i'm an Ati 7750 user and my pj is only 1080p . I was talking about the chroma setting of a bluray 1080p too.
annovif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 13:24   #23662  |  Link
Buckster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 18
I'm surprised with a 7750

I'm running an overclocked 7850 and can only manage 32 Neurons to get no dropped frames, anything 64 and above is lag-fest
Buckster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 14:09   #23663  |  Link
Thunderbolt8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,197
I dont really have a clue about all those test patterns and stuff, but Id suggest the following anyway:

- since madVR is used as a video renderer, comparisons should almost exclusively be made with videos and not some kind of grey ramps. its rather pointless to use something else as comparison for which madVR is not meant to be used.

- it would also help if madshi could state each time what to look out for when comparing stuff, which factors and which others can or should be disregarded. e.g. in case of error diffusion low noise smoothness is what should be achieved and not crispness. so the factor crispness should be disregarded when doing comparisons no matter how good it might subjectively look or some kind of pop effect or whatever. imho its vital that people stick to this when doing their comparions, but also that madshi points out such things each time this should apply. otherwise all this testing wont lead to anything.
__________________
Laptop Lenovo Legion 5 17IMH05: i5-10300H, 16 GB Ram, NVIDIA GTX 1650 Ti (+ Intel UHD 630), Windows 10 x64, madVR (x64), MPC-HC (x64), LAV Filter (x64), XySubfilter (x64) (K-lite codec pack)
Thunderbolt8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 15:08   #23664  |  Link
GREG1292
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Fort Wayn,Indiana
Posts: 52
madVR - high quality video renderer (GPU assisted)

OCD for me as a4 has more pop but OCD is more detailed and accurate and a deeper and more detailed depth going back into
the screen. More natural or balanced. All are good and if we
have access to all the test builds
In one folder we can pick and choose. Problem solved for everyone with only one build needed. Thanks everyone as we
all have different eyes and viewing.

We need to all use the same setting as madshi if he would share
so we can give input that is similar. I know screens and video cards
are different but if we use default for MadVR and our graphic cards
would that not level the playing field? We need a standardize test
as not everyone has the same gpu power. Since I am not a programmer I am just going to leave my input as OCD or R2D2 and a brief description.

You all know that I prefer the GTX770 over the 7870xt
on my projector and that is with everything default on both
madVR and gpu settings. Where the GTX770 pulls ahead is when
gpu load increases and remains smooth and stutter free with no
over heating with neurons used.

Sorry for the additional comments I like testing but sometimes feel it is for
my own selfish needs.
__________________
2011 VDC 9500LC ULTRA Mike Parker Modded 12-3-2015
GTX-770 and Intel Xeon V1235
Windows 10

Last edited by GREG1292; 22nd February 2014 at 16:25. Reason: spelling and grammer issues.
GREG1292 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 15:19   #23665  |  Link
James Freeman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Freeman View Post
Try to lower the Saturation in MPC, or remove it completely (-100) to lower/remove the visible Color influence, and test the builds again.
The results may vary...
Quoting myself because I want to emphasize this.

With no color at all (Saturation to -100).

I can see colored pixels the MultiColor dithering creates in 4-bit with real content.
Then I quickly changed the desktop folder name to something else to return to 8-bit (no need to close the paused video).
Now I can't see any color what so ever.

To verify that the colored dithering is still there in 8-bit (although completely unseen now), I took some screen shots of 4-bit & 8-bit (same frame) and boosted the Saturation in photoshop.
Yes, the 8-bit has the same colored dithering but I needed to boost the saturation four times more compared to 4-bit, to see the same level of saturation.

Still,
OppositeColor Dynamic is absolutely the smoothest looking, in 4-bit or not.


P.S
On 4:2:2 TV's the colored dithering pixel will be TWICE as big horizontally, that may bias some users to falsely judge the Multi/Opposite Color builds.
So please try to test the builds on a 4:4:4 monitor or TV.
__________________
System: i7 3770K, GTX660, Win7 64bit, Panasonic ST60, Dell U2410.

Last edited by James Freeman; 22nd February 2014 at 15:43.
James Freeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 16:20   #23666  |  Link
Shiandow
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
I think so, too. At least I see no better solution right now.
The only convincing alternative I can think of is the one I posted a few pages back where you simply pick a random color (r,g,b) such that r+g+b=0. The Yuma noise from this algorithm should be significantly lower than the one from the opposite algorithm, all channels have the same distribution, and all values between -0.5 and 0.5 are possible. The only downside I've found is that not all values between -0.5 and 0.5 are equally likely, values around 0 are twice as likely as those at the extremes (this is because there are twice as many possible values for g,b such that r+g+b=0 if r is near 0). This effect may actually not be a bad thing but you'd need to check that gradients still look nice and possibly retune the algorithm to account for the different noise distribution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Yes, this effect is what I earlier called the "dirty screen effect". You're describing it as a "dirty lens effect", which is basically the same thing. I do wonder, though, whether this effect is visible/distracting at all at 8bit. If it's not, maybe it'd be better to stick to the static builds to keep the subjective noise as low as possible? I'm on the fence on this one. It's definitely a trade between lower subjective noise floor (pro static) and dirty screen/lens effect (contra static).
FWIW I think that I can occasionally see dirt on my screen that causes less than a 1/256th difference in brightness. Although I don't think I'd be able to tell the difference between this and 'artificial dirt'. On the other hand if my screen was kept meticulously clean then I might very well be able to notice 'artificial dirt'.

Edit: I actually made a mistake when measuring the amount of Y noise, the oppositeColor method seems to be better than the alternative I proposed. I thought it was weird that there didn't seem to be much of a difference between oppositeColor and multiColor was so small, turns out that the numbers I used for oppositeColor weren't random. Anyway I now have a mathematical 'argument' that oppositeColor causes less Y noise than multiColor.

Last edited by Shiandow; 22nd February 2014 at 20:36.
Shiandow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 17:03   #23667  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
I might be mistaking but some of you would appear to base their opinion on the 4bit trick? Nev has made quite clear that this doesn't quite scale with 8bit...maybe madshi could provide a way to go 6bit? It would be closer to 8bit and might actually be useful to the 6bit TN crowd(FWIR mVR doesn't currently officially support ED for 6bit).

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6233638 View Post
There's a very good chance that viewing in 4:2:2 will be affecting the results. I do all my testing in 4:4:4.
I clearly remember that a while ago you were advising to go 4:2:2 if the TV would then allow noticeably better post-processing and quite frankly I'm not trading 24/50Hz support & BFI for 60Hz-only 4:4:4. Not a good deal at all as far as movies are concerned, OTOH computer fonts eventually look heaps better.

Also, several Sammy 1080p TV reviews claim that if you disable BFI you only get 360p..

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6233638 View Post
How do you feel "adaptive4" compares to "mono static" ? (not mono static temporal)
I assumed that these two builds were identical from madshi's explaining, maybe he could confirm?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6233638 View Post
I have just done some more testing with the "static" builds, and I know what it is that I don't like about them.

When the camera moves, e.g. in a hand-held shot where there is a subtle swaying motion, because the dither pattern is static it looks like there is something on the lens, as it moves with the camera.

With the dynamic builds, it's randomized so this does not happen.
Yes the noise level is somewhat higher, but I just don't see it being an issue when viewing at 8-bit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Yes, this effect is what I earlier called the "dirty screen effect". You're describing it as a "dirty lens effect", which is basically the same thing. I do wonder, though, whether this effect is visible/distracting at all at 8bit. If it's not, maybe it'd be better to stick to the static builds to keep the subjective noise as low as possible? I'm on the fence on this one. It's definitely a trade between lower subjective noise floor (pro static) and dirty screen/lens effect (contra static).
I am not seeing any dirty lens or DSE whatsoever, maybe BFI is saving the day on this one? OTOH with dynamic builds, the dither grain is way too random & shaky and kills the original movie grain appearance to my eyes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Let me add the original image to make the comparison more helpful:

| -- monoColor -- | -- multiColor -- | -- oppositeColor -- | -- original -- |

As you can see, there's no grain in the original image, and the background is supposed to be blurred. Ok, so this test image does not help us decide which of the error diffusion algorithms reproduces film grain in the best possible way. We need a different video/image for that. But this image does show us which error diffusion algorithm produces the lowest subjective luma noise levels. Agreed?
Well, you are taking a 8bit source, processing it in all kinds of ways in 16bit and then outputting to 8bit again....there will obviously be some resolution lost? And this is the mid-noise algorithm, I'm sure you could lower it and/or possibly use other values than 1.0 or 0.97 weight sums(still very curious about what that'd do ).

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
do you like ClearType? I think that's somewhat similar to Multi/OppositeColor. I've read that some people are bothered by ClearType and prefer it turned off, while the majority of people prefer it turned on.
I am forced to run Windows in 4:2:2 and computer fonts look pretty nasty...CC makes it even worse and I tried every flavor using the W7 CC tuner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GREG1292 View Post
OCD for me as a4 has more pop but OCD is more detailed and accurate and a deeper and more detailed depth going back into the screen. More natural or balanced. All are good and if we have access to all the test builds In one folder we can pick and choose. Problem solved for everyone with only one build needed.
Good to know, so if your brain can stand the chroma rainbow noise with no sweat then it's a good bet I guess

If it's a deal breaker or if all you care for is pop "über alles" then A4 is a good choice too IME/HO.

Hopefully at some point madshi with decide to go with a default algorithm and allow the minorities to pick their favorite using a registry key...if providing that choice in the UI is truly out of the question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Having a higher luma noise floor can make the image appear more detailed. But that's most definitely *not* the purpose of error diffusion. The main purpose of error diffusion is to simulate a higher bitdepth as much as possible. So the better the error diffusion works, the less crisp the image might actually appear, compared to a higher-noise alternative. So what we should be aiming for is not crispness, but low noise smoothness. If you want that small amount of added crispness, you can add artificial grain, or sharpen the image
Fine, but A4 does it all so well...all roads lead to Rome you know. Sharpening usually goes along with nasty white halos and artificial grain always appears to be living a life of its own...only GrainFactory3() would allow to choose the strength and chunk size for dark/mid/bright pixels but even with a lot of finetuning it still didn't look as "natural" as A4 and it's a major CPU hog too.

So does that means that the softer look & motion blur of the color builds is by design and more "technically optimal"?

All this said, I come from the CRT/DLP world and I basically want my LCD to look like them. Many ppl claim that DLP comes with a stunning "cinema-like" analog look and I was strongly impressed by my old 3K:1 Mitsubishi HC3100 on a daily basis using a 2m wide projection screen from a 3.3m distance. It looked so real and so enjoyable. PQ was a real thrill thanks to the 600:1 ANSI contrast and invisible black during bright scenes(with its iris closed).

DLP looks very sharp thanks to the single panel(and mineral glass lenses on the HC3100) but also grainy due to the mirrors holders and it's a known trick to use grain in order to deblock.

Also, FWIR even the most optimal bluray 8bit encodes are always a compromise when it comes to movie grain...all this to say that subjectively speaking A4 does it all at once for me: deblocking, natural looking grain-based edge enhancement, analog look, reinforcing movie grain without changing its pattern/direction, etc etc..

A4 also saves the day with upscales and I still believe that every display comes with its own dithering pattern and it's obvious that we all more or less see differently so there can't be such a thing as a magical "one size fits all" mVR dithering algorithm IMHO. Also, even with BFI LCD is still not nearly as responsive as CRT.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian View Post
I wish I still had a bigger screen so I could do my own testing.
IIRC Joe Kane made clear in that very interesting video that you need as big of a screen as possible in order to seriously evaluate video processing.

I find 32" from a 80 cm distance to be perfect for 1080p content, but it'll sure take something seriously big to start whining all over again about 4K dithering to madshi

Quote:
Originally Posted by GREG1292 View Post
I to am only concerned about the picture
Thank you for the kind words, I learned a lot from ppl like MLill on HCFR.

Last edited by leeperry; 22nd February 2014 at 18:17.
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 17:33   #23668  |  Link
*Touche*
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
It looked so real and so enjoyable. PQ was a real thrill thanks to the 600:1 ANSI contrast and invisible black during bright scenes(with its iris closed).
That doesn't look impressive.
*Touche* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 17:55   #23669  |  Link
Soukyuu
Registered User
 
Soukyuu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
True. But XP support is only one out of several reasons why I'm using D3D9.
Does anything (besides the porting effort) speaks against switching to openGL+openCL and go multiplatform? I think you mentioned going pure openCL at some point.
__________________
AMD Phenom II X4 970BE | 12GB DDR3 | nVidia 260GTX | Arch Linux / Windows 10 x64 Pro (w/ calling home shut up)
Soukyuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 17:57   #23670  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Touche* View Post
That doesn't look impressive.
Well, +500:1 ANSI for a video projector is quite high AFAIK...at least it was when I was using it in 2007. And I wasn't dressed like a ninja in a room with black walls ^^

MLill kept a measured specs comparison here and you can see that even in 2012 there are few projectors that would provide >500:1 measured ANSI contrast, most of them being DLP for that matter.

I of course thoroughly enjoy how on a LCD flat screen the ANSI contrast is equal to the native contrast
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 18:03   #23671  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soukyuu View Post
Does anything (besides the porting effort) speaks against switching to openGL+openCL and go multiplatform? I think you mentioned going pure openCL at some point.
OpenGL makes native DXVA impossible (or at least pointless), and also doesn't give you access to DXVA deinterlacing or DXVA scaling anymore.

So a feature loss, for what gain?
Its not like other platforms have DirectShow, or even any comparable video frameworks where a renderer could just "plug in" like it can in DirectShow.

Not to mention that Error Diffusion uses DirectCompute now, which is part of DirectX, and a Windows technology.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 18:07   #23672  |  Link
DragonQ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 934
I've never understood the love for projectors. Sure it's a relatively cheap way to get huge pictures but it's impossible to get as good black levels as most LCDs, let alone plasmas, even in dark rooms. I remember watching clips of LotR at a friend's house a few years ago on his projector and I wasn't impressed at all.
__________________
TV Setup: LG OLED55B7V; Onkyo TX-NR515; ODroid N2+; CoreElec 9.2.7
DragonQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 18:17   #23673  |  Link
Buckster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 18
currently comparing the image output of the various experimental builds- but have to echo other people's views in that its great to even be able to try out different flavours of picture processing - especially as some is personal taste really

with the new processing, OpenCL upscaling etc - I've not seen a better image output to my Panasonic Plasma (Pro PF11) - and therefore would like to express my great thanks to Madshi
Buckster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 18:30   #23674  |  Link
6233638
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
I clearly remember that a while ago you were advising to go 4:2:2 if the TV would then allow noticeably better post-processing and quite frankly I'm not trading 24/50Hz support & BFI for 60Hz-only 4:4:4. Not a good deal at all as far as movies are concerned, OTOH computer fonts eventually look heaps better.
Yes, for viewing it's worth sacrificing chroma resolution if it means you gain better image quality in other areas, such as backlight scanning on an LCD.

But if you're trying to critically judge something like dither algorithms where pixel-level details matter, I wouldn't do it in anything less than full resolution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
I am not seeing any dirty lens or DSE whatsoever, maybe BFI is saving the day on this one? OTOH with dynamic builds, the dither grain is way too random & shaky and kills the original movie grain appearance to my eyes.
Dithering is much finer than film grain. In fact, I have yet to find any sources where it has a visible effect in 8-bit.

Every time I think I am seeing noise in the image from dithering, it turns out to be noise that is encoded in the source. (just as visible when I disable dithering)

In fact, I am finding that due to the noise level being lower with error diffusion rather than random dithering, that sort of thing is a lot more noticeable now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
Good to know, so if your brain can stand the chroma rainbow noise with no sweat then it's a good bet I guess
So do you find the color and opposite builds to be noisier in this image?

Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
All this to say that DLP looks very sharp thanks to the single panel(and mineral glass lenses on the HC3100) but also grainy due to the mirrors holders and it's a known trick to use grain in order to deblock.
Just use the 4-bit mode all the time if you want a more DLP or Plasma-like image. The much-revered Kuros only use 14 shades when drawing an image, and 4-bit gives you 16...
6233638 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 18:37   #23675  |  Link
iSunrise
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
And it's incorrect that you say that we add more noise. That's simply not true. If you look at real video content, the oppositeColor build has the lowest subjective noise level.
I guess thatīs where our wording differs a bit and what we mean by it, so Iīm trying to make it more clear. Iīm not even talking about subjective noise floor/level or subjective noise perception, because these can clearly be fooled easily, as can our perception of depth (crisper image = better image). Because I actually agree, ED4 clearly gives a crisper image (not necessarily a good thing, but since you asked about subjective analysis, thatīs what we did).

However, the images that were provided (e.x. by you and 6233638) clearly show that more noise is added, not less. Thereīs more noise dots and they also are closer together, meaning, itīs way thicker than with the ED4/mono_static build (thatīs the smoothness youīre talking about), so basically, itīs filling way more gaps as before with the ED4/mono_static build. And since we are only comparing still shots (where this is already visible), when being in motion, thereīs even more noise which is changing itīs pixel position all the time, because the noise is dynamically changing, whereas it was static before. That doesnīt have to be a bad thing and I didnīt say as much. Actually I already said the opposite myself, before I even did a subjective test, because when I am thinking about changing picture contents, the noise should adapt to the contents or else, we wouldnīt technically be dithering anymore, we would just add noise. The problem with this is, that on static parts of an image (where there are usually quite a lot of), you would have a lot of changing noise all the time. This was the trade-off we were talking about.

Now, concerning the noise itself. If itīs visible or not, is a completely different story. And thatīs all I was trying to say. Now, the question is, what we want to achieve and I agree with you, we should strive for an accurate appearance.

But how do we know that we are accurate? Shouldnīt the dithering algorithm only add noise where it is needed? Why donīt we add even more noise that is closer together? And I was just thinking out loud, if we already crossed that bridge, yet.

Now, comparing the builds, while the multicolor_dynamic build also makes that additional noise stand out quite a bit (thatīs a bad thing), the opposite_dynamic build reduces the visibility of the noise by quite a lot. So, yes, the opposite build clearly has a lower perceived noise floor compared to the multi_dynamic build. But ED4 still has the least amount of noise (just look at the sky picture, provided by 6233638), even though itīs clearly more visible. Which is the trade-off with ED4.

Since we are currently evaluating the medium-noise dithering algorithm (which the opposite_dynamic build comes closest currently), the aim should be "as accurate as possible, like RD with a lot less noise", while the aim for the low-noise algorithm should be "accurate, but only as much noise as needed". Or how would you define that yourself?

Last edited by iSunrise; 22nd February 2014 at 19:14.
iSunrise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 18:45   #23676  |  Link
Buckster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 18
for a Panasonic Plasma (PF11 with DualHDMI board) - should I be aiming to output 4:4:4 from my ATI card or 4:2:2 ? I thought my panel accepts RGB 4:4:4 - but I struggle to get to see any of the black levels in the black levels test
Buckster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 18:57   #23677  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6233638 View Post
if you're trying to critically judge something like dither algorithms where pixel-level details matter, I wouldn't do it in anything less than full resolution.
If I disable BFI I end up with 360p motion(from what many reviews are claiming at least, and indeed it's motion-blur galore to my eyes), pretty nasty flickering and I'm stuck in 60Hz-land, I don't see how that's gonna help with anything. Especially as YV12 is 4:2:0 to begin with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6233638 View Post
Every time I think I am seeing noise in the image from dithering, it turns out to be noise that is encoded in the source. (just as visible when I disable dithering)
I see where you're going but that definitely doesn't match what I see in Oblivion as the "dynamic" mechanism utterly veils the picture to my eyes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6233638 View Post
So do you find the color and opposite builds to be noisier.
All those static screenshots are undeniable, especially as madshi made clear that the goal is softness.....too bad those colorful builds look blurry in motion to me(and to a few others as well apparently).

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6233638 View Post
Just use the 4-bit mode all the time if you want a more DLP or Plasma-like image.
The HC3100 is using 10bit processing with the DDP3020 chip: http://www.mitsubishielectric.com.au/354.htm
Quote:
equipped with a combined full 10-bit processing I/P converter and scaler, and a 12-bit floating point digital gamma controller. The result is approximately four times the number of gradations of a conventional 8-bit model

Last edited by leeperry; 22nd February 2014 at 21:02.
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 20:01   #23678  |  Link
XMonarchY
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
OppositeColor looks much cleaner than others to me. I don't know why my opinions differ so much from others, maybe its the 4:2:2 3000:1 CR SPVA that makes things worse with noisy builds or whatever else, but I like OppositeColor the opposite the most... I also like the least noisy ED build the most (Noisy2Limited I think is the name).

Should we not have a lot more people in this sample group to really figure out what the public likes the most?
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 20:25   #23679  |  Link
XMonarchY
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Also, I wonder if the broken OpenCL <-> D3D9 interlop is because nVidia does not feel like supporting D3D9 is very important. I think Windows XP is too ancient to support. Who is going to use ED and NNEDI3 on Windows XP??? You need a powerful card to run it and all powerful cards users have Windows 7 or Windows 8.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2014, 20:29   #23680  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
Actually I don't think you can get OCL support under XP at all, at least it wasn't recognized as active by GPU-Z with a HD7850 and the latest AMD drivers a few months ago: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=117956.0
Quote:
I have a 7870 running XP and have the same problem. No OpenCL devices. have tried all the different driver versions I could get my hands on, and the different SDK's to no avail.
And DirectCompute is part of DX11.
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
direct compute, dithering, error diffusion, madvr, ngu, nnedi3, quality, renderer, scaling, uhd upscaling, upsampling

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 23:59.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.