Author Topic: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?  (Read 31068 times)

zerowalker

  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #45 on: May 19, 2015, 04:20:51 pm »
Simply put, it's pretty much.
If your system isn't bottle-necked by the performance hit from Encoding/Capturing in itself (HDD, CPU etc).
Then there is no gain.

If it's limited by the API forcing to flush all the time for each capture, then you will gain (pretty much) same fps no matter the Encoding/Capturing tool.

That's if i understand things correctly. Nvidia simply has a Hardware tool for this. You can simply read what the GPU is currently showing on the screen directly without using the API.
That's superfast with no additional cost.

Though i wonder, shouldn't any capturing be possible then, like Desktop, opening games etc. Can't it continue to capture all things that's beeing shown on screen?
And why doesn't it capture the mouse, is that added later on the frame? (I think it doesn't show mouse, maybe be wrong about this).

mouse

  • Noob
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #46 on: August 21, 2015, 02:40:36 am »
Having tried bandicam with nvenc vs a variety of different codecs and recording software, nvenc definitely saw much better performance, despite using a standard hook.

Repeating this.
Real world testing. Windowed recording. Large performance improvement over using standard codecs using nvenc. Was able to record close to 100fps without issue.

Is bandicam some kind of voodoo magic? Because it seems more like a shoddy recording program with a lack of features and an obnoxious interface, and somehow still the only software to record from a window and encode with nvenc.

icez

  • Noob
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #47 on: October 19, 2015, 10:36:45 pm »
Well, recording with lossless codec and with shadowplay\NVECN then encoding and I can't tell the quality difference between both after uploading them to youtube. To me recording lossless is just a waste of time, hard disk and cpu performance. Really the diference is not noticeable after uploading to youtube...

Mirillis Action record in 1080P with NVENC and I have less than 5% perfomance hit, very close to what Shadowplay offers and the audio can be record in 320kbits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x687IwpXbHw
« Last Edit: October 19, 2015, 11:04:00 pm by icez »

De-M-oN

  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #48 on: October 20, 2015, 09:03:18 am »
errrr .. its getting boring and I'm getting a bit tired of this :(

a) CPU usage is with lossless actually much lower than with lossy mechanics - thats logic. And for nowadays cpu lossless compression is a side task for the cpu. The real performance drop happens while disturbing the rendering pipeline of Direct3D / OpenGL.

Hell I gave you even a URL in this thread, so here again:

http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4687310&postcount=61

and nvidia reacts to it like this:
http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4983364&postcount=5

So no cpu overwhelmed here...

Your whole bottleneck is slow harddisk drives, wrong settings by user, and how said the framecapturing out of graphics API.

I have a RAID 0, record now with the Capture Card Datapath Vision DVI-DL which records lossless. I record in 2560x1600 @ 50fps and do you know what? No FPS Drop when recording with lossless. But yes of course I see now how the cpu is overwhelmed by using lossless capture  :P - this just proves that the developer of MSI Afterburner didnt say anything wrong (and would've been highly strange for such a person who writes this capture- and graphiccard tuning application.

Your problem relies simply here:

Quote
Your whole bottleneck is slow harddisk drives, wrong settings by user, and how said the framecapturing out of graphics API.

That re-encoding of lossy sources is bad for quality should even be well known for mp3 files. There at least it should be known, that its absolutely not recommended to re-encode them. But why you do it with videos then? And for the audio you dont seem to care as well.

You sure also will say the 50mbit by Shadowplay is an awesome bitrate. There is more than enough games which are THAT hard to compress, that you see a difference between lossless and 50mbit. This happens especially with the ultra fast encoding settings which Live h.264 compression uses - this includes shadowplay.

Here a local comparison with 50mbit vs lossless:

Lossless:
http://abload.de/img/720plossless68umt.png

50 mbit:
http://abload.de/img/720p50.000kbitsqjumh.png

Difference already on local side clearly visible by every human eye on earth.

Quote
Really the diference is not noticeable after uploading to youtube...

Youtube result by using Mirillis Action for capturing:
http://abload.de/img/bild17zu94.png

Youtube result by using Lossless for capturing:
http://abload.de/img/bild2luuhp.png


... and you really want me to say, there is no difference? Come on...

If you could speak german I could show you a video which explains very well some basics about compression and then you would by yourself avoid re-encoding of lossy, because you then would realize what you are doing to the encoders.

icez

  • Noob
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #49 on: October 20, 2015, 09:28:43 am »
errrr .. its getting boring and I'm getting a bit tired of this :(

....

Can you please tell me what codec do you use, what settings for it and Dxtory and the render settings of your software? Thanks.

De-M-oN

  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #50 on: October 20, 2015, 09:38:12 am »
how said - now I use a capture card.

But:

UTVideo RGB (Dividor @ 3, (x) optimized for decoding speed), 2560x1600 @ 50fps.

I switched to MSI Afterburner though, because it's framecapturing code causes for me a bit less fps drop and a more stable fileFPS at HFR (High Framerate)


For a single HDD I would try rather UTVideo 4:2:0 or 4:2:2 (4:2:2 may be faster with utvideo if the HDD is not a bottleneck then)
If you need 4:2:0 for your HDD, try MagicYUV with for example 3 compression threads and set to 4:2:0 mode.


Further coding information you can see here:

http://paste2.org/kpFvPLmh
« Last Edit: October 20, 2015, 09:39:43 am by De-M-oN »

icez

  • Noob
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #51 on: October 20, 2015, 10:08:57 am »
how said - now I use a capture card.

But:

UTVideo RGB (Dividor @ 3, (x) optimized for decoding speed), 2560x1600 @ 50fps.

I switched to MSI Afterburner though, because it's framecapturing code causes for me a bit less fps drop and a more stable fileFPS at HFR (High Framerate)


For a single HDD I would try rather UTVideo 4:2:0 or 4:2:2 (4:2:2 may be faster with utvideo if the HDD is not a bottleneck then)
If you need 4:2:0 for your HDD, try MagicYUV with for example 3 compression threads and set to 4:2:0 mode.


Further coding information you can see here:

http://paste2.org/kpFvPLmh

Thanks! I weas using UT Code but yes, HDD is a problem. I have only a 2TB HDD with 180mb\s speed. Sometimes I record 40 min of gameplay and I will use only 2 minutos of it (montage)... So in time my HDD get full... And render settings, because it seem that my footage is in very good quality after I render it but when it goes to youtube gets blocky, blurry and low quality.

De-M-oN

  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #52 on: October 20, 2015, 10:18:57 am »
Use 2048x1152 for 16:9
or 1920x1200 for 16:10

and use 41fps or higher. 41 to 60 is a trade off between video quality and smoothness. I decided to use 50 for a compromise of both.

At 2048x1152 you'll get encode ID #308 instead of 303. 308 is their 1440p encode, but since it is not native 1440p it will replace the 1080p label on the player and the 1080p label will run the good 308 encode then.

But 2 things:

No Firefox
No Flash Player

Both dont support VP9. But their vp9 videos have much better quality than their h.264 ones and 1440 and 4k HFR are only offered as vp9.

icez

  • Noob
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #53 on: October 20, 2015, 10:24:05 am »
Use 2048x1152 for 16:9
or 1920x1200 for 16:10

and use 41fps or higher. 41 to 60 is a trade off between video quality and smoothness. I decided to use 50 for a compromise of both.

At 2048x1152 you'll get encode ID #308 instead of 303. 308 is their 1440p encode, but since it is not native 1440p it will replace the 1080p label on the player and the 1080p label will run the good 308 encode then.

But 2 things:

No Firefox
No Flash Player

Both dont support VP9. But their vp9 videos have much better quality than their h.264 ones and 1440 and 4k HFR are only offered as vp9.

Thanks a lot. Really good to talk with someone who understand about this. But what container\codec to use when rendering? MP4 AVC or WMV QVBR? I already use the 1440p method with the resoltuin that you mentioned with aspect ratio of 16:9. I`m using as reference the Threatty videos, from youtube. When you mentio the browser are you talking about sending the file throught it or playback? Should I upload the file only through chrome\ie?
« Last Edit: October 20, 2015, 10:25:32 am by icez »

De-M-oN

  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #54 on: October 20, 2015, 10:30:48 am »
In the paste2 link you can see what I use.

x264 at 10bit mode, with CRF16 and YV24 colorspace. CRF16 and YV24 arent good for small filesizes. I go all for quality, because I have very good upload speed.

I would start with normal YV12 colorspace (which is 4:2:0) and a CRF of 21.
Audio I personally use FLAC, it is lossless and makes it possible that youtube gets at least audio lossless and does make only as a last step the lossy conversion (the optimal method)
If you want lossy I would recommend you Opus or Nero AAC. Only the MKV Container supports FLAC or Opus. NeroAAC would be usable with MP4 as well. But I would prefer MKV. Supports more codecs and is in general the best Container for H.264 AVC files.

Quote
When you mentio the browser are you talking about sending the file throught it or playback? Should I upload the file only through chrome\ie?

I meant of course playback.

Because Firefox and Flash Player as well dont support VP9. So Flash Player and Firefox would play the worse looking h.264 encodes by them. Also ensure that you dont have any addon in usage, which force using flash or h.264. For example "Magic Actions" does force h.264 playback as default, if I remember right.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2015, 10:33:47 am by De-M-oN »

icez

  • Noob
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #55 on: October 20, 2015, 11:15:18 am »
In the paste2 link you can see what I use.

x264 at 10bit mode, with CRF16 and YV24 colorspace. CRF16 and YV24 arent good for small filesizes. I go all for quality, because I have very good upload speed.

I would start with normal YV12 colorspace (which is 4:2:0) and a CRF of 21.
Audio I personally use FLAC, it is lossless and makes it possible that youtube gets at least audio lossless and does make only as a last step the lossy conversion (the optimal method)
If you want lossy I would recommend you Opus or Nero AAC. Only the MKV Container supports FLAC or Opus. NeroAAC would be usable with MP4 as well. But I would prefer MKV. Supports more codecs and is in general the best Container for H.264 AVC files.

Quote
When you mentio the browser are you talking about sending the file throught it or playback? Should I upload the file only through chrome\ie?

I meant of course playback.

Because Firefox and Flash Player as well dont support VP9. So Flash Player and Firefox would play the worse looking h.264 encodes by them. Also ensure that you dont have any addon in usage, which force using flash or h.264. For example "Magic Actions" does force h.264 playback as default, if I remember right.

Ok so you encode it with MeGUI. So what should I do? Edit the video in the editor like Vegas, render as uncompressed AVI and then encode with MeGUI, right? Or should I just encode right away from vegas to h264 with AVI container? Another question: Since the file is too big and I only need some minutes of it, can I just crop it on Vegas and reenconde in UT codec since it`s lossless?
« Last Edit: October 20, 2015, 11:17:14 am by icez »

icez

  • Noob
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #56 on: October 21, 2015, 09:52:24 am »
In the paste2 link you can see what I use.

x264 at 10bit mode, with CRF16 and YV24 colorspace. CRF16 and YV24 arent good for small filesizes. I go all for quality, because I have very good upload speed.

I would start with normal YV12 colorspace (which is 4:2:0) and a CRF of 21.
Audio I personally use FLAC, it is lossless and makes it possible that youtube gets at least audio lossless and does make only as a last step the lossy conversion (the optimal method)
If you want lossy I would recommend you Opus or Nero AAC. Only the MKV Container supports FLAC or Opus. NeroAAC would be usable with MP4 as well. But I would prefer MKV. Supports more codecs and is in general the best Container for H.264 AVC files.

Quote
When you mentio the browser are you talking about sending the file throught it or playback? Should I upload the file only through chrome\ie?

I meant of course playback.

Because Firefox and Flash Player as well dont support VP9. So Flash Player and Firefox would play the worse looking h.264 encodes by them. Also ensure that you dont have any addon in usage, which force using flash or h.264. For example "Magic Actions" does force h.264 playback as default, if I remember right.

Ok so you encode it with MeGUI. So what should I do? Edit the video in the editor like Vegas, render as uncompressed AVI and then encode with MeGUI, right? Or should I just encode right away from vegas to h264 with AVI container? Another question: Since the file is too big and I only need some minutes of it, can I just crop it on Vegas and reenconde in UT codec since it`s lossless?

I found your video on youtube while looking for MeGUI tutorials... I followed the exact same settings that you used on MeGUI encoder and the result is horrible for me, on 1080P looks more like SD 360P I don`t know whats wrong  :-\ :-\ :-\. Here`s a sample:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frZ-kMSckhw

And here is the type of quality that I want to achieve on youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgdUAQPEPZo



De-M-oN

  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #57 on: October 21, 2015, 09:56:52 am »
The video looks fine for me.
Are you sure you watched it at ID #308 ?

icez

  • Noob
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #58 on: October 21, 2015, 02:01:42 pm »
The video looks fine for me.
Are you sure you watched it at ID #308 ?

Well, I encoded at 2048x1152 and watched it at the label 1080P on Youtube... Is that right?

De-M-oN

  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 166
Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
« Reply #59 on: October 22, 2015, 03:45:38 am »
Yes but for that short video : Pause the video, select 1080p by yourself (automatic still considers 303 not just 308) and wait until it has switched and then continue watching.

switching while playback takes some time to switch.

Anyway - the video looks as expected. Maybe you really watched accidentally the wrong encode ID.