Connexion rapide:  

Forum: General Discussion

Sujet Will this help? - Page: 1

Cette partie de ce topic est ancien et peut contenir des informations obselètes ou incorrectes

So since once again we are stuck without our favorite fxs if we switch to the 64 bit version will this little plugin actually help run the 32 bit version of VDJ any better??

https://ntcore.com/?page_id=371
 
Posté Thu 24 Jan 19 @ 6:36 pm
AdionPRO InfinityCTOMember since 2006
No, the 32 bit version of vdj is already compiled to be able to use 4gb.
Anyway, it's unlikely vdj would use that amount of memory
 
Posté Fri 25 Jan 19 @ 3:47 am
What if I got have multiple live camera feeds, lots of different animated logos playin on screen, videos and pictures via Dropbox showing up on screen, sms with pictures, Twitter with pictures all showing up on the screen.

I can see a massive difference from the 32 bit version when compared to the 64 bit version.

My video FPS hover around 50/60 while skin is around 30 FPS when using the 64bit version

But when using the 32bit version my video FPS drop down to around 15/20 and my skin is around the same.

This was done with the 32bit version



You can see how the video looks choppy or it’s dropping frames.

Or maybe I just need a new Windows based laptop??
 
Posté Fri 25 Jan 19 @ 3:54 am
AdionPRO InfinityCTOMember since 2006
The 64 bit version uses directx 11, which is the major reason why it runs better than the 32 bit version

If you would be using more than 4gb of ram with the 32 bit version it would simply crash, not slow down
 
Posté Fri 25 Jan 19 @ 4:59 am
Also you seem to compare the 32 bit version loaded up against 64 bit loaded with what? If you compare the 2 be sure to compare them when doing the same amount of work. That's all I can tell from your statements anyway and maybe you did compare the 2 equally.

Main thing is going to be your computer specs. CPU and GPU. So mentioning that is the best info you can give. I want to do a lot as well and I am flat out not happy unless my display FPS is in sync with the monitors refresh rate. In my case, 60 FPS. Any odd ball number like 50, etc is not going to be as smooth.
 
Posté Fri 25 Jan 19 @ 5:37 am
Yeah I’ve played with both versions only running videos and video samples because the fxs I wanna use aren’t 64 bit ready but to answer your question.

The 32 bit version runs the skin and video at around 17-25 FPS

While the 64 bit version says the skin is at 30 FPS and the videos are running at 50-60 FPS , definitely can see the difference.

It’s an Asus with an i7 (not a quad core) with an NVIDIA 745m that has 2 gigs of its own ram. Running Windows 8.1. Nothing special as you can see and it does do a pretty decent considering the amount of crap I make it do Lmmfao!!

I’m thinking I’ve maxed it out and I’m probably just pushing it to hard, I don’t know. So I was just asking because I didn’t know and don’t really know to much. Hell I’ve never even optimized this windows machine. I just loaded up the programs I needed and went. But as you can clearly see it does get the job done. Optimizations is Probably something I should look into, stripping down the OS to bare essentials.

 
Posté Fri 25 Jan 19 @ 5:49 am
Did you run the test on 2 different machines? One Win 8.1 and one Win 10?

I would view the 745m as a low end GPU when trying to perform as you are. That 'm' is a stinker too. The 745m passmarks around 900, while the desktop version 745 passmarks over 2000.

I use an old i7 with a 1060 GPU. The 1060 passmarks around 9000. The 10 series have dropped the m designation which means the laptop and desktop versions should be the same but heat can take a told still. I consider the 1060 to be lower high end but is ok for me.

If I was performing like you, I would have the most kick ass machine I could get which would mean an expensive laptop, but for me I would probably use a much cheaper easier to upgrade or fix tower which would out perform the expensive laptop.
 
Posté Fri 25 Jan 19 @ 6:34 am
Thank and yeah I hear what your saying.

I’m stuck between getting a new MacBook or getting a Windows laptop.

I did find this Asus which is around half of a new Mac

ASUS GL503GE-RS71 (SCAR Edition), Intel Core i7-8750H (2.2GHz - 4.1GHz) Processor, 15.6" 120Hz 3ms Full HD (1920 x 1080) 94% NTSC Display, 8GB (1x 8GB) DDR4 2666MHz Memory, 1TB FireCuda SSHD, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050Ti (4GB) GDDR5 Graphics Card, Microsoft Windows 10 (64-bit), Gigabit Ethernet LAN, Intel 9560 Gigabit WIFI, Bluetooth 4.1, HDMI, Mini Display Port, USB 3.1 Type C, 3x USB 3.1 Type A, 1x USB 2.0, 4-Zone RGB Illumination Keyboard

Seems like a decent machine, thoughts??
 
Posté Fri 25 Jan 19 @ 12:03 pm
AdionPRO InfinityCTOMember since 2006
Looks good. I personally prefer a 4k screen, but if you're happy with 1080p then it should be a good laptop.
Regardless for best performance you'll need the 64-bit version though, in my tests it looks like especially nvidia drivers perform much poorer in DirectX 9 compared to DirectX 11 (the difference is much smaller when using the on-board intel gpu)
 
Posté Fri 25 Jan 19 @ 1:09 pm
So you’re saying maybe I should try using the Intel video card for right now instead of the NVIDIA card??
 
Posté Fri 25 Jan 19 @ 2:15 pm
AdionPRO InfinityCTOMember since 2006
Yes, you could give that a try as well.
 
Posté Fri 25 Jan 19 @ 2:20 pm
My testapp for DX11 can run DX9, DX9EX, or DX11. The drawing code is nearly identical for each with slight variations for each version.

Not a real accurate test because still tuning things up, but letting DX9 and DX11 run amok with no sleep states and immediate mode and using NVIDIA 1060:

DX9 got around 5700 frames per second. DX11 got around 6200 frames per second. For anyone reading, those frame rates are worthless for display. Perfect smoothness with no tearing only comes when you match the monitors refresh rate. (typically 60hz) When you try to display more frames than the monitors refresh rate, frames are just thrown away so it appears to be giving you more frames but it is not. Most of the frames are being discarded. Lower than the monitors refresh rate, gives you choppy behavior unless exactly half, like 60hz to 30hz. The figures need to be almost exact... FPS like 27, 33, 54, 65, just don't cut it for perfect smoothness. When you see it you know it because it is glass smooth. With DX9 if is hard to get exactly 30 fps when in window mode. So if you try 30 FPS with VDJ, it will most likely be choppy. I did achieve exactly 30 FPS with a test app for DX9, but it was not so simple as you might expect. With DX11, 30 FPS is simple. It is smooth when synced but it is still not as good as 60 FPS. The only way I can get perfect smooth in VDJ 32 is to have skin FPS and video FPS both set to 60. If either is different, in comes the chop since they conflict with each other.. And it worries me that with VDJ 64 they are auto dropping the frame rate I think of the skin sometimes which may have a negative impact on the display. A smooth 30 FPS is easy with DX11. Just not quite as good as 60.

Keep in mind I am talking about perfect smooth and it is awesome but for just playing video you won't notice it.

So the above test gives a rough idea of the underlying graphics management.
 
Posté Sun 27 Jan 19 @ 5:35 pm
So I tried the Intel videocard tonight and I did notice a huge difference. Everything was so much smoother........my skin FPS stayed around 30 and the video never dropped below 45. All the scrolling marquees and my wave forms were smooth.

But.......

The folders I have set up and totally media for carousel and media anytime it got to a video the videos usually would not play I could see it switching between them but I think that it was just too much video in the end for her to run smoothly.

I shouldn’t say too much “video” but I was probably hitting the limits of the Intel card maybe.

I don’t know much so I’m probably wrong, lol!
 
Posté Mon 28 Jan 19 @ 2:11 am
Just to clarify, it wasn’t the videos that VDJ was playing it was only the carousel and media crate where the videos wouldn’t play.
 
Posté Mon 28 Jan 19 @ 2:34 am
the SOUND INSURGENT wrote :
...my skin FPS stayed around 30 and the video never dropped below 45.


In other words, it sucked :)
 
Posté Mon 28 Jan 19 @ 8:53 am
the SOUND INSURGENT wrote :
Just to clarify, it wasn’t the videos that VDJ was playing it was only the carousel and media crate where the videos wouldn’t play.


That sounds like the Intel driver bug it took me 6 months to find. I had found one place where Intel admitted to the problem. There is a driver fix for it and that driver was a special download and can't remember where. Easier though is to go into options under yuv decoding and select software instead of hardware. In this case the driver reports that it can do something when it cannot. The videos are playing but just not displaying. Let me know if that was the problem.
 
Posté Mon 28 Jan 19 @ 10:46 am
Yup sounds like that’s the big.

At first I wasn’t paying attention to the external monitor but this morning when I tried that’s what was happening. I saw the video flickering every so often.

So the videos were playing but not being displayed properly.

I’ll try and find a new driver tonight and see how it goes. If that fixes it I guess I’ll use the Intel card from here on out as it does have better performance then the Nvidia card from what I can see.
 
Posté Mon 28 Jan 19 @ 12:46 pm
Don Moir wrote :
the SOUND INSURGENT wrote :
...my skin FPS stayed around 30 and the video never dropped below 45.


In other words, it sucked :)



No it didn’t suck, Lmmfao!!

You can really see the difference in the scrolling marquee and the waveforms. It’s like night and day.

The only thing that sucked was trying to record. I would hit the record button and everything would freeze up for a good 30 seconds.

After the freeze stopped the recording was good.
 
Posté Mon 28 Jan 19 @ 12:49 pm
Well my best guess is that it sucked and the reason is that since your frame rate is not matching the refresh rate of the monitor it is going to be choppy... You cannot tell that when just video playing because the video is not moving and it is constantly changing.. You need to view it with things moving horizontally.

My other guess is that you have never seen what really good is so you don't have a good reference point. Your only comparison is that is is better than what you were using before and not necessarily good.

..and my guesses aren't something I just pull out of a hat... they come from years of experimentation and endless hours looking at it... so I would be very surprised if things were not choppy for you... at least what I would consider choppy. When you see perfect smooth, it is like everything is gliding over glass...
 
Posté Mon 28 Jan 19 @ 1:25 pm
Lol! I’d have to agree with that.

Anyways I’ll try and find that Intel driver tonight but if you have a link please post here or just email me if you could.

Thanks for the time and info.
 
Posté Mon 28 Jan 19 @ 1:33 pm
67%