[Request] NVEnc support in the future?

[zerowalker]

Interesting, didn't know ShadowPlay bypassed the API.
But how is that even possible and why can't 3rd party do that?
What about AMD Raptr?

And also, i am guessing you only mean FPS drop in the sense of "as long as CPU usage doesn't interfere with the game".

EDIT:

Ah read the topics, so it's pretty much cause they got some hardware features that they can use to simply "copy paste" the buffer without having to tell the API to send a copy.
I hope AMD gets some similar shit, usually they make it all open source.

[JinxSwe]

Read the linked threads. You even dont gain any performance advantage if dxtory will NVEnc. Because the necessary apis for it are locked by nvidia to bypass DirectX - They want that their shadowplay is used if you want more speed. And this means you have with NVEnc the exact same fps drop like with cpu encoder.

It is all detailed written in the links.

So for what do you need NVEnc then?


And why are you so aggressive? Arent you able to discuss normally? You and shamis really act like little aggressive kids. I would write normal as well. But people like you and especially shamis arent people where a discussion would be in the slightest possible.

Why is it so important to you that people don't have this choice I wonder.

It just is wasted programming work and time for a thing which doesnt improve things, if the necessary API is locked by Nvidia to gain from that.

There are more important things to do - like better OpenGL Performance - there for example is DXTory very slow.

I had to register a account just to respond to this. And also request the NVEnc.
It seems like u never have used the NVEnc. Im using it on Bandicam and OBS and im getting 0 simply 0 loss of frames with NVEnc and I have never seen another encoder that can record so good quality with 0... I say again 0 loss of frames. And the files size are good for the quality.

I want the NVEnc on DXtory since its one for the few programs that can seperate audio files.

[JinxSwe]

It seems like u never have used the NVEnc

I have and you see my results. And read the Links I posted as well. And Unwinder isnt silly - he just is the developer of MSI Afterburner.


0 loss of frames is possible with lossless too - just get a fast harddrive.

Or did you mean with it the fps rate? Look my results - its not faster at all compared to cpu encoder - maybe its just an bottleneck which slows your fps down at lossless codecs. The most reason for this is a too slow harddisk (not enough write speed).

And it doesnt matter which game - if no bottleneck (I have RAID 0 and so on - so no bottlenecks at my system) then the cpu encoder arent slower than nvenc at all. Reasons you can read clearly at the urls I've given in my post.

Nither u or Unwinder show eny proof of the NVEnc is in eny way bad. Unwinder just nags about the NVEnc first been locked to Shadowplay and that his CPU sucks.
And this isn't a debate on what codec is better then the other.
This is about some of us feel that the NVEnc is a good codec and we would like it in DXtory. Not every one can afford new hardware and I my self find the NVEnc to be a good
substitute to lossless becuse it dosn't need the newest CPU or HHD. And producing good quality videos with less file sizes.

If u want to compare codecs do it in another thread.

[zerowalker]

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]

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]

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

[icez]

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]

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

[icez]

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]

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]

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?

[De-M-oN]

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.

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.

[icez]

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.

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?

[icez]

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.

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]

The video looks fine for me.
Are you sure you watched it at ID #308 ?