This forum uses cookies
This forum makes use of cookies to store your login information if you are registered, and your last visit if you are not. Cookies are small text documents stored on your computer; the cookies set by this forum can only be used on this website and pose no security risk. Cookies on this forum also track the specific topics you have read and when you last read them. Please confirm whether you accept or reject these cookies being set.

A cookie will be stored in your browser regardless of choice to prevent you being asked this question again. You will be able to change your cookie settings at any time using the link in the footer.

HD source input is slowed down
#1
Input a progressive HD source to encode and my conversion rate drops to around 3 fps when I get around 12 fps on SD input sources. I ran 2 different tests, one with nnedi3 resize enabled and one without since the input is already 1920x1080. Both around 3 fps speed. Source linked below. Debug included. Any recommendations?

Input source
Reply
#2
Since HD has 4 times the pixels, SD content has, an according speed drop to that the processing speed seems correct.
Especially filters like TemproalDegrain2, which are 'slow' to begin with. Smile
You can try tweaking the settings. Like the block size for MAnalyse. Smaller block sizes give better results at the cost of speed. Smile
Also, using num_streams=3 is probably a bottleneck, since you are probably running out of vram on HD content with it. (at least my system with 16GB VRAM would)
num_streams=3 on SD content is probably fine, but on HD and higher this will slow stuff down.
Increasing the fftThreads might help too.

Cu Selur
----
Dev versions are in the 'experimental'-folder of my GoogleDrive, which is linked on the download page.
Reply
#3
Ah yeah that makes sense now about the larger input source file. I was able to get pretty good results with SMDegrain settings that also sped it up a bit but to around 7 fps. I can live with that. Don't need to clean up the HD sources that much either since they look visually pretty clean.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)