VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Consider supporting us by disable your adblocker or Try ConvertXtoDVD and convert all your movies to DVD. Free trial ! :)
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2
1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 51
Thread
  1. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    Hi,

    is there any better performance with avisynth+ then with Avisynth 2.6MT + QTGMC [vit mod]

    is there 64bit combo for any of those two?

    on I5 650 CPU based system, I am getting 40fps for SD video at QTGMC fast setting . (no other filters involved, only deinterlacing)
    For ex. should it be possible to get 20 more fps with the same settings, on the same computer or my expectations should be set lower?
    I try to tweak MT parameters, but maybe someone could help with that a bit ?

    Regards.
    Last edited by logicom; 27th Nov 2014 at 16:49.
    Quote Quote  
  2. 64 bit won't be significantly faster.

    Without encoding, On my i5 2500K I get about 110 fps and nearly 100 percent CPU usage with QTGMC(preset="fast") when encoding 720x480 material.

    Code:
    SetMtMode(5,4)
    Mpeg2Source("filename.d2v")
    SetMtMode(2)
    QTGMC(preset="fast")
    When encoding with x264 with the veryfast preset it drops down to about 90 fps. With the slow preset about 50 fps.

    Code:
    x264.exe --preset=slow --crf=18 --keyint=50 --sar=8:9 --output %1.mkv %1
    Watch CPU usage in Task Manager while filtering/encoding. If you see less than 100 percent CPU usage you may be able to squeeze out more performance. With some filters you need more threads than cores to max out the CPU. Maybe 1.5x to 2x the number of cores. And with some sources decoding of the source is the bottleneck.
    Last edited by jagabo; 27th Nov 2014 at 10:35.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Central Germany
    Search PM
    There is no 64 bit version of AviSynth 2.60 MT (because the development of the original AviSynth 2.50+ project is dead).

    And there is a 64 bit version, but no MT version of AviSynth+ ... yet?
    Quote Quote  
  4. By the way, my results were with 2.6 MT, 32 bit.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    Hi,

    QTGMC is well threaded, I see that cpu is squeezed at 100%, I am using 2.6 MT, 32 bit and I noticed that delay introduced by the chain FFmpegSource2, DV decoder and ffmpeg is actually the reason for having maybe a bit lower FPS than expected. Source is 4:2:0 DV25>MOV
    Just for reference, there is a SSD raid 0 and 8 GB of ram. Any suggestion for ffmpeg version/flavor ?

    Regards.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Since you're already at 100% usage, not much is going to help

    The only thing that will make it faster is to use faster settings : either in QTGMC settings, or encoding settings, or both
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    Hi,

    I do not encode, but just for testing I will run it now on dual X5470 and e5 2697 v2

    Regards.
    Last edited by logicom; 27th Nov 2014 at 17:05.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Originally Posted by logicom View Post

    I do not encode.
    What are you using ffmpeg for ? uncompressed mov ?
    Quote Quote  
  9. If you're not encoding , how are you measuring the script speed? avsmeter ?
    Quote Quote  
  10. Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    If you're not encoding , how are you measuring the script speed? avsmeter ?
    I used VirtualDub's File -> Run video analysis pass.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Originally Posted by logicom View Post

    I do not encode.
    What are you using ffmpeg for ? uncompressed mov ?
    There is no call to x264 , I am just piping trough ffmpeg to null. And there is no "uncompressed mov" in this case.

    ex:
    ffmpeg -i deintMOV.avs -vcodec copy -an -f null out.null
    Once I run video analysis pass in virtualdub, with show in and out video disabled, I am getting lover FPS, for about 15%, instead of 42 it is 35 and CPU is in both cases at 100%.

    Tautologically speaking, CPU mark is one most important parameter for filtering or encoding, or processing in general , but I was looking into possibilities for further optimization with the goal of getting better result in FPS units.

    Regards.
    Last edited by logicom; 28th Nov 2014 at 04:55.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Central Germany
    Search PM
    A possible solution; but avsmeter has some features specifically implemented for benchmarking, and is probably easier to use, and a lot smaller without libav codecs.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by LigH.de View Post
    A possible solution; but avsmeter has some features specifically implemented for benchmarking, and is probably easier to use, and a lot smaller without libav codecs.
    I partially agree on that, but taking ffmpeg as a reference would be mandatory as it just reflects one real scenario so that it is wise to have a comparison testing,taking into account possible delay produced by its I/O routines , while not kilning the cpu with encoding task for the moment, nor rewrapping nor performing any other additional processing. I would rather look into the chain of processes and individual actions, trying to minimeze impact, and then go for real drive.

    All benchmarking methods are giving slightly higher fps initially, but I wait a while to get the stable average resault.
    Ironically enough, benchmarking tool you have mentioned gives higher result than vdub but lower than ffmpeg



    c:\AVSMETER>avsmeter C:\ffmpeg\deintMOV.avs -l

    AVSMeter 1.9.0 (x86) by Groucho2004
    AviSynth 2.60, build:Sep 28 2013 [15:09:12] (2.6.0.4) (MT)

    Active MT Mode: 1
    Number of frames: 85710
    Length (hh:mms.ms): 00:57:08.400
    Frame width: 720
    Frame height: 576
    Framerate: 25.000 (25/1)
    Colorspace: YV12

    Frames processed: 1232 (0 - 1231)
    FPS (min | max | average): 2.599 | 346396 | 38.98
    CPU usage (average): 98%
    GPU usage: GPU monitor disabled
    Thread count: 37
    Memory usage (phys | virt): 1145 | 1169 MB
    Time (elapsed): 00:00:31.602
    Code:
    c:\ffmpeg\ffmpeg -i deintMOV.avs -vcodec copy -f null out.null
    ffmpeg version N-65991-g8c63a0d-Sherpya Copyright (c) 2000-2014 the FFmpeg developers
      built on Aug 31 2014 05:10:22 with gcc 4.9-win32 (GCC)
    Input #0, avisynth, from 'deintMOV.avs':
      Duration: 00:57:08.40, start: 0.000000, bitrate: N/A
        Stream #0:0: Video: rawvideo (I420 / 0x30323449), yuv420p, 720x576, 25 fps, 25 tbr, 25 tbn, 25 tbc
    Output #0, null, to 'out.null':
      Metadata:
        encoder         : Lavf56.3.100
        Stream #0:0: Video: rawvideo (I420 / 0x30323449), yuv420p, 720x576, q=2-31, 25 fps, 25 tbn, 25 tbc
    Stream mapping:
      Stream #0:0 -> #0:0 (copy)
    Press [q] to stop, [?] for help
    frame= 1759 fps= 42 q=-1.0 Lsize=N/A time=00:01:10.36 bitrate=N/A
    video:110kB audio:0kB subtitle:0kB other streams:0kB global headers:0kB muxing overhead: unknown
    Received signal 2: terminating.

    Regards.
    Last edited by logicom; 28th Nov 2014 at 06:24.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Central Germany
    Search PM
    Thread count: 37

    Sounds exhausting? Despite MT mode = 1?
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by LigH.de View Post
    Thread count: 37

    Sounds exhausting? Despite MT mode = 1?
    SetMTMode(5,8) is the cause, reminiscence from tweaking but 3,4-8 is just good enough.

    Regards.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Central Germany
    Search PM
    May be too extreme, except you really have 2 Octocore with HT. Remember, QTGMC also spawns EDI threads on its own.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by LigH.de View Post
    May be too extreme, except you really have 2 Octocore with HT. Remember, QTGMC also spawns EDI threads on its own.
    I assigned 2 thread for EDI , at this moment I dont see extra threads by it, however MT have to be higher, and not extreme, otherwise, CPU load variations are noticeable or suboptimal result in FPS is present. I am looking forward to put it on double dodeca core with HT - e5 2697 v2.
    Last edited by logicom; 28th Nov 2014 at 08:52.
    Quote Quote  
  18. You should be testing real life scenario. While script testing is important for bottlenecks, the effect on actual encoding scenario might be different. You have other threads that required for encoding. In your setup you will get better results with parallel encoding multiple instances (faster overall, higher quality, fewer problems)
    Quote Quote  
  19. Originally Posted by logicom View Post
    ex:
    ffmpeg -i deintMOV.avs -vcodec copy -an -f null out.null
    Once I run video analysis pass in virtualdub, with show in and out video disabled, I am getting lover FPS, for about 15%, instead of 42 it is 35 and CPU is in both cases at 100%.
    When I run that ffmpeg command line I see only 25% CPU usage and about 38 fps (compared to 100 percent CPU usage and 115 fps in VirtualDub).
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    Originally Posted by logicom View Post
    ex:
    ffmpeg -i deintMOV.avs -vcodec copy -an -f null out.null
    Once I run video analysis pass in virtualdub, with show in and out video disabled, I am getting lover FPS, for about 15%, instead of 42 it is 35 and CPU is in both cases at 100%.
    When I run that ffmpeg command line I see only 25% CPU usage and about 38 fps (compared to 100 percent CPU usage and 115 fps in VirtualDub).
    Now we are talking I must admit that is unusual and not expected for me. May you provide output sample, with ver included ?
    Quote Quote  
  21. try adding:
    Code:
    SetMemorMax(768)
    to the start of your avisynth script and
    Code:
    distributor()
    return last
    to it's end when decoding the script with ffmpeg
    users currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555
    Quote Quote  
  22. Here's the ffmpeg log:

    Code:
    C:\Users\John\Desktop>"G:\Program Files\ffmpeg\bin\ffmpeg.exe" -i C:\Users\John\
    Desktop\VTS_01_1.avs -vcodec copy -an -f null out.null
    ffmpeg version N-67331-g547fce9 Copyright (c) 2000-2014 the FFmpeg developers
      built on Nov  1 2014 22:01:52 with gcc 4.9.1 (GCC)
      configuration: --enable-gpl --enable-version3 --disable-w32threads --enable-av
    isynth --enable-bzlib --enable-fontconfig --enable-frei0r --enable-gnutls --enab
    le-iconv --enable-libass --enable-libbluray --enable-libbs2b --enable-libcaca --
    enable-libfreetype --enable-libgme --enable-libgsm --enable-libilbc --enable-lib
    modplug --enable-libmp3lame --enable-libopencore-amrnb --enable-libopencore-amrw
    b --enable-libopenjpeg --enable-libopus --enable-librtmp --enable-libschroedinge
    r --enable-libsoxr --enable-libspeex --enable-libtheora --enable-libtwolame --en
    able-libvidstab --enable-libvo-aacenc --enable-libvo-amrwbenc --enable-libvorbis
     --enable-libvpx --enable-libwavpack --enable-libwebp --enable-libx264 --enable-
    libx265 --enable-libxavs --enable-libxvid --enable-zlib
      libavutil      54. 11.100 / 54. 11.100
      libavcodec     56. 10.101 / 56. 10.101
      libavformat    56. 12.100 / 56. 12.100
      libavdevice    56.  2.100 / 56.  2.100
      libavfilter     5.  2.101 /  5.  2.101
      libswscale      3.  1.101 /  3.  1.101
      libswresample   1.  1.100 /  1.  1.100
      libpostproc    53.  3.100 / 53.  3.100
    Input #0, avisynth, from 'C:\Users\John\Desktop\VTS_01_1.avs':
      Duration: 00:00:33.37, start: 0.000000, bitrate: 0 kb/s
        Stream #0:0: Video: rawvideo (I420 / 0x30323449), yuv420p, 720x480, 59.94 fp
    s, 59.94 tbr, 59.94 tbn, 59.94 tbc
    Output #0, null, to 'out.null':
      Metadata:
        encoder         : Lavf56.12.100
        Stream #0:0: Video: rawvideo (I420 / 0x30323449), yuv420p, 720x480, q=2-31,
    59.94 fps, 59.94 tbn, 59.94 tbc
    Stream mapping:
      Stream #0:0 -> #0:0 (copy)
    Press [q] to stop, [?] for help
    frame= 2000 fps= 38 q=-1.0 Lsize=N/A time=00:00:33.36 bitrate=N/A
    video:125kB audio:0kB subtitle:0kB other streams:0kB global headers:0kB muxing o
    verhead: unknown
    Here's VirtualDub running the video analysis pass:

    Click image for larger version

Name:	vdub.jpg
Views:	575
Size:	77.2 KB
ID:	28890
    Quote Quote  
  23. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    SetMemoryMax(1024)
    SetMTMode(3,4)
    FFMpegSource2("C:\ffmpeg\intput.mov")
    SetMTMode(2)
    QTGMC(preset="very fast", EdiThreads=2)
    SelectEven()
    SetMTMode(1)
    GetMTMode(false) > 0 ? distributor() : last
    try this script.
    Quote Quote  
  24. With that script (opening an NTSC VOB file, 720x480) I get about 115 fps with ffmpeg and VirtualDub. distributor() is making the difference with ffmpeg.

    Interestingly, with this script:

    Code:
    SetMtMode(5,4) 
    Mpeg2Source("VTS_01_1.d2v")
    SetMtMode(2)
    QTGMC(preset="very fast")
    Distributor()
    I get about 180 fps with ffmpeg, 150 fps with VirtualDub. But if I remove Distributor() I get about 70 fps with ffmpeg, 180 fps with VirtualDub.
    Last edited by jagabo; 29th Nov 2014 at 00:11.
    Quote Quote  
  25. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    QUOTE=poisondeathray;2359604]You should be testing real life scenario. While script testing is important for bottlenecks, the effect on actual encoding scenario might be different. You have other threads that required for encoding. In your setup you will get better results with parallel encoding multiple instances (faster overall, higher quality, fewer problems)[/QUOTE]

    What are you talking about ?
    Quote Quote  
  26. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    With that script (opening an NTSC VOB file, 720x480) I get about 115 fps with ffmpeg and VirtualDub. distributor() is making the difference with ffmpeg.
    Nice!
    Quote Quote  
  27. Originally Posted by logicom View Post
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    With that script (opening an NTSC VOB file, 720x480) I get about 115 fps with ffmpeg and VirtualDub. distributor() is making the difference with ffmpeg.
    Nice!
    I added a bit more to my last post.
    Quote Quote  
  28. Originally Posted by logicom View Post
    Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    You should be testing real life scenario. While script testing is important for bottlenecks, the effect on actual encoding scenario might be different. You have other threads that required for encoding. In your setup you will get better results with parallel encoding multiple instances (faster overall, higher quality, fewer problems)
    What are you talking about ?
    Are you asking about the quality hit ? or fewer problems

    I'm referring to the encoder side of things, there is an inverse relationship: the more threads , the lower the quality (eg. SSIM, PSNR) . But it's negligible at low thread counts. Once you get into higher thread counts (eg. workstation / server encoding like your setup) it becomes more relevant
    Quote Quote  
  29. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    Originally Posted by logicom View Post
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    With that script (opening an NTSC VOB file, 720x480) I get about 115 fps with ffmpeg and VirtualDub. distributor() is making the difference with ffmpeg.
    Nice!
    I added a bit more to my last post.
    Can you please try input from mov ? Just ot check if it is the same as with d2v files.

    Regards.
    Last edited by logicom; 29th Nov 2014 at 02:37.
    Quote Quote  
  30. Member logicom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Serbia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Originally Posted by logicom View Post
    Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    You should be testing real life scenario. While script testing is important for bottlenecks, the effect on actual encoding scenario might be different. You have other threads that required for encoding. In your setup you will get better results with parallel encoding multiple instances (faster overall, higher quality, fewer problems)
    What are you talking about ?
    Are you asking about the quality hit ? or fewer problems

    I'm referring to the encoder side of things, there is an inverse relationship: the more threads , the lower the quality (eg. SSIM, PSNR) . But it's negligible at low thread counts. Once you get into higher thread counts (eg. workstation / server encoding like your setup) it becomes more relevant
    We just discussed about filtering performance and possible optimizations, but thanks for the input, again nothing to do with encoding
    But anyway, could you please provide some reference paper which further discuss this phenomena that you mentioned? Like impact on video quality and implicitly video quality measurement parameters due to the high number of threads ? I would love to dig into that inverse equation.
    Quote Quote