8k UHD vs 8k HD Playback

[Jarilo]

What would cause an issue where specifically the 8192 x 4096 (8k UHD) resolution would start to play just fine but a minute into the video would stutter and stop playing ( sound continues ) where as 7680 x 3840 (8k HD) is perfectly fine. This happens in or out of VR on any player (VLC, WMP, Whirligig). CPU is around 25% usage during both and GPU is on new drivers etc. Hardware is claimed to support both. Codec pack is installed by LAV, unless it's missing something.

[Shizumauru]

My guess is: Your 4096 video is encoded in AVC/H264 while the 3840 one is encoded in HEVC/H265. AVC is not made for such huge resolutions and causes heavy GPU usage. I have no clue why some sites still offer AVC for resolutions over 4k - most probably for weaker standalone HMD...

[Jarilo]

Thanks for the help, but I have been just checking. They are both H.265 , so I'm not sure what is going on with it.

[GT500]

In my experience Whirligig has a lot of trouble playing H.265/HEVC videos with resolutions higher than 5400x2700. What resolutions are problematic probably varies from computer to computer based on system specs (I have a Ryzen 7 3800X, 64GB DDR4-3600 RAM, and an RTX 3070 Ti). Not sure what exactly the limitation is as the GPU decoder isn't usually overloaded when the issue happens. When I have trouble with a video I just pull out something like FastFlix and resize the video into a resolution I know my system can handle playing.

As for H.264/AVC I find that decoding is actually more efficient, and playback of larger resolution videos is smoother when they are encoded with this codec. The big issue with H.264 is the file size can be almost twice as large for the same quality as H.265 (you also lose some color accuracy with H.264). You can try transcoding the larger video into H.264, but note that FastFlix doesn't include an option for the NVENC H.264 encoder so you'll either have to use another tool (XMedia Recode for instance) or live with a slow software encode. The encode would be slow either way because 8K video is massive, however it's so much slower with a software encode that it may not be worth it unless you have a 16-core/32-thread CPU or better (a Ryzen 9 3950X, 5950X, or 7950X would be good or an Intel 12900K or 13900K would be good).

You could also try AV1 and see if that's easier to decode. YouTube uses it for 8K video, so maybe it would be OK? Unfortunately if you don't have an RTX 40 series GPU (or AMD/Intel GPU) with AV1 encoding support you'll be stuck doing software encoding, and AV1 is super slow when doing software encoding and I find that the SVT-AV1 encoder (which is faster because it can use all CPU cores) tends to produce blurry video at more reasonable bitrates (haven't tried high bitrates yet because it wasn't worth it).

I think FastFlix may have an option for NVENC AV1 encoding, but hides it if your GPU doesn't support it. It may also support Intel and AMD encoders, however it hides them when you don't have an Intel or AMD GPU if it does have support for them.

Let me know if you want to see what settings I use for NVENC H.264/AVC or NVENC H.265/HEVC encoding. It's quality isn't as good as software encoding, but you can get close if you use certain encoding options to improve quality.

[Ukobach]

I'd really like to see your settings. As far as I'm concerned, there is absolutely no need for the most absurdly high UHD resolutions. 4K video has always been enough for me, especially in combination with Whirligig's internal AA and automatic supersampling.

If I can shave down huge videos from 8K to 4K, I'll be able to run them AND store them. Win/win situation, man.

[Jarilo]

There is a massive visual quality difference between 7168 x 3584 vs a resolution of 4k like 3840 x 1920. It's not even close. Maybe the fall off noticeable point is earlier if you are using a really old headset like a DK1 but even at the resolution of the original Vive and CV1 it's noticeable. Let a lone a newer headset. I don't have issues performance wise running them or storing them, space is cheap now on PC, the issue seems software and driver based for going specifically over 8k and I'd like to get to the bottom of it.

[Ukobach]

Originally posted by Jarilo:

There is a massive visual quality difference between 7168 x 3584 vs a resolution of 4k like 3840 x 1920. It's not even close. Maybe the fall off noticeable point is earlier if you are using a really old headset like a DK1 but even at the resolution of the original Vive and CV1 it's noticeable. Let a lone a newer headset. I don't have issues performance wise running them or storing them, space is cheap now on PC, the issue seems software and driver based for going specifically over 8k and I'd like to get to the bottom of it.

That's all fair enough. I suppose I was exaggerating a bit more than I realized. I'll freely admit something, too: I use a Quest 2 that baaaaarely allows me to fit my eyeglasses inside, with the eyeglass spacer thingy. Soooo, yeah, I go without vision correction a lot of the time, and I guess that kinda made me just think "pfft, I'm not really seeing the benefit of these massive resolutions."

More importantly, however, you are ONE HUNDRED PERCENT CORRECT that the whole issue of choppy playback with these larger resolutions is mysterious and in need of an actual solution. My PC is completely capable of running massive video files in a flat player, without any hiccups. I know that there's extra system resources being used when the video is played through Whirligig, but I really, truly don't see any logical way to account for the extreme lag and stuttering.

[Jarilo]

It's just strange how no one knows the reason why it would do this, yet UHD is widely used now. It always starts of playing fine, then sound lags behind, then stutter, and then freeze of image.

[JazzKungFu]

I have the same problem. 3840p plays great, but 4096p is unwatchable. Moreover, the Whirligig program is not to blame for this - the same thing happens in standard Windows 10 players: Movies & TV and Windows Media Player. At first it goes well, but after a few seconds it starts to stutter and freeze very badly. The most interesting thing is that the third-party player PotPlayer reproduces everything wonderfully without any brakes. If you change the HEVC decoder to the system one in the PotPlayer settings, then it also starts to stutter. But with the built-in decoder everything is fine! So it’s the Windows HEVC plugin that’s bad and it’s the one to blame for all this? Dear Phil, is it possible to somehow embed codecs from the PotPlayer player into Whirligig?! They are very good and work like clockwork! After all, you were able to somehow embed codecs from the same third-party player called VLC! Isn't it possible to do the same from PotPlayer?

[Jarilo]

Originally posted by JazzKungFu:

I have the same problem. 3840p plays great, but 4096p is unwatchable. Moreover, the Whirligig program is not to blame for this - the same thing happens in standard Windows 10 players: Movies & TV and Windows Media Player. At first it goes well, but after a few seconds it starts to stutter and freeze very badly. The most interesting thing is that the third-party player PotPlayer reproduces everything wonderfully without any brakes. If you change the HEVC decoder to the system one in the PotPlayer settings, then it also starts to stutter. But with the built-in decoder everything is fine! So it’s the Windows HEVC plugin that’s bad and it’s the one to blame for all this? Dear Phil, is it possible to somehow embed codecs from the PotPlayer player into Whirligig?! They are very good and work like clockwork! After all, you were able to somehow embed codecs from the same third-party player called VLC! Isn't it possible to do the same from PotPlayer?

Wow, someone who knows what I am talking about. Yea, that's the problem. Still no fix for me. I just avoid anything specifically above 8k. Though, it begs the question what is potplayer doing different then? how can a obscure program be so efficient compared to media player codec from Microsoft, it's kind of wild.

[JazzKungFu]

What version do you have installed, paid "HEVC Video Extensions" ( https://apps.microsoft.com/detail/9NMZLZ57R3T7 ) or free "HEVC Video Extensions from Device Manufacturer" ( https://apps.microsoft.com/detail/9N4WGH0Z6VHQ )? The thing is that nothing works for me with “HEVC Video Extensions”; when I try to play the video in standard players, I get error 0xc00db3b3, saying the codec is not installed. Many users complain about this in reviews, give only one star rating and write that we spent a dollar, but in the end nothing works, scammers, return the dollar. But the free version from the manufacturers works and has a high rating in reviews, unlike the paid version. Apparently, Microsoft screwed something up again, and again, as always, everything works crookedly for them.
What I'm saying is that this may be the reason. Maybe in order to avoid stuttering, you need to install the paid version? But how else can I install it, I installed it, but it doesn’t work at all!

[GT500]

Originally posted by JazzKungFu:

What version do you have installed, paid "HEVC Video Extensions" ( https://apps.microsoft.com/detail/9NMZLZ57R3T7 ) or free "HEVC Video Extensions from Device Manufacturer" ( https://apps.microsoft.com/detail/9N4WGH0Z6VHQ )? ...

Have you tried LAV Filters for DirectShow? It includes decoding for H.264 (AVC), H.265 (HEVC), VP9, AV1, and many others. You can get it on Github at the following link:
https://github.com/Nevcairiel/LAVFilters/releases

BTW: There have been improvements in the VLC implementation in the latest release of Whirligig, and it may work better than it used to. Extremely high res video may still be problematic, but I think that with the performance improvements in the betas I was able to play a video that was 7680x3840 using LAV Filters with Whirligig set to DirectShow without too much trouble, and those improvements should all now be in the latest stable version. 8192x4096 was still problematic, and rather choppy, so this doesn't solve all problems.

Note: H.265 video may be specifically difficult to play at high resolutions. If you don't mind it taking a very long time, you can transcode the video into VP9 and it may play smoother at the same resolution and bitrate. I know H.264 plays smoother at the same resolution and bitrate plus it's a lot faster to encode into H.264, but you lose quality with H.264 at the same bitrate as H.265.

[JazzKungFu]

Originally posted by GT500:

Have you tried LAV Filters for DirectShow? It includes decoding for H.264 (AVC), H.265 (HEVC), VP9, AV1, and many others. You can get it on Github at the following link:
https://github.com/Nevcairiel/LAVFilters/releases

Yes, of course I tried: before that I had version 0.75.1, now I tried to install the latest version 0.78, but in the end it works the same, it stutters. I also tried to select LAV everywhere in Win7DSFilterTweaker 6.4, but that didn’t help me either. Then I tried to remove LAVFilters and install K-Lite Codec Pack Mega 17.9.4, but as I understand it, the same LAVFilters works there, and 8K stuttered there in the same way. The most interesting thing is that after installing LAVFilters, when PotPlayer began to show through LAVFilters (if you select the HEVC system codec in the PotPlayer settings), it already shows perfectly as in the case of the built-in PotPlayer codec. If in LAV Video Configuration the “Hardware Decoder to use” parameter is selected DXVA2 (native) or Intel QuickSync (old), then of course it also stutters (because decoding occurs only on the processor without the participation of the video card). But if you choose DXVA2 (copy-back), D3D11 or NVIDIA CUVID (old), then decoding occurs on the video card and the videos in PotPlayer are played back wonderfully without any stuttering. But here’s a strange thing: firstly, for some reason in Whirligig, of these three methods, only NVIDIA CUVID (old) works, and secondly, for some reason it shows there with strong stutters (it shows for 1 second, then freezes for 1 second, then it shows for 1 second, freezes for 1 second, etc.) (which is strange, considering that from the task manager it is clear that decoding occurs on the video card, the GPU load is shown at 80-90%, and my video card is not weak - 1080Ti)! And if you select DXVA2 (copy-back) or D3D11, then Whirligig cannot start playing these videos at all, there is a toy windmill spinning endlessly.

Originally posted by GT500:

BTW: There have been improvements in the VLC implementation in the latest release of Whirligig, and it may work better than it used to.

Да, я также пробовал выбрать VLC. Там еще хуже, мало того, что заикания есть, так еще и изображение постоянно разбивается на квадратики!

Originally posted by GT500:

Extremely high res video may still be problematic, but I think that with the performance improvements in the betas I was able to play a video that was 7680x3840 using LAV Filters with Whirligig set to DirectShow without too much trouble, and those improvements should all now be in the latest stable version.

I have no problems with 7680x3840; it plays perfectly in any mode.

Originally posted by GT500:

8192x4096 was still problematic, and rather choppy, so this doesn't solve all problems.

It is with this resolution 8192x4096 that I have problems. Nothing works to reproduce them in Whirligig without stutters. Even the same LAVFilters, which in other players show without stutters, in Whirligig for some reason shows with stutters!

Originally posted by GT500:

If you don't mind it taking a very long time, you can transcode the video into VP9 and it may play smoother at the same resolution and bitrate.

Thanks, but I don't know how to do this. In this case, it’s easier for me to re-download the same videos just in a lower resolution.

[GT500]

Originally posted by JazzKungFu:

Originally posted by GT500:

If you don't mind it taking a very long time, you can transcode the video into VP9 and it may play smoother at the same resolution and bitrate.

Thanks, but I don't know how to do this. In this case, it’s easier for me to re-download the same videos just in a lower resolution.

One of the easiest ways is FastFlix: https://github.com/cdgriffith/FastFlix/releases

Keep in mind that you will want a pretty high bitrate for 8K video, and it will take forever to encode since your GPU isn't going to have hardware accelerated encoding for VP9 (GPU's will do hardware accelerated decoding of VP9 to allow smoother playback, but they don't do encoding of VP9). You could end up waiting for more than one day for a single 8K video to encode in VP9, depending on how long it is. You can compensate for this by using a faster setting and setting the bitrate higher to preserve quality.

If you have a video card that can do hardware accelerated AV1 encoding then that would be faster, however I don't know if Whirligig can handle 8K AV1 video any better than it handles H.265 (HEVC).

[Jarilo]

Originally posted by JazzKungFu:

It is with this resolution 8192x4096 that I have problems. Nothing works to reproduce them in Whirligig without stutters. Even the same LAVFilters, which in other players show without stutters, in Whirligig for some reason shows with stutters!

I have tried to solve the issue for a while months ago to no success, I just figured once I get new hardware I will try again. It seems we both share the same GPU ( a 1080 ti ). Perhaps this card has some kind of video rendering limitations on the codecs. I gave up, but I will keep track of this chat if someone has a solution. It's always specifically over 8xxx by 4xxx resolution that it starts. and it's not a Whrligig specific thing as all video players on the desk top do it so I'm guessing that's why founder of Whirligig doesn't touch it. It's an issue on Virtual Desktop and competitors as well.

[GT500]

Originally posted by Jarilo:

I have tried to solve the issue for a while months ago to no success, I just figured once I get new hardware I will try again. It seems we both share the same GPU ( a 1080 ti ). Perhaps this card has some kind of video rendering limitations on the codecs. I gave up, but I will keep track of this chat if someone has a solution. It's always specifically over 8xxx by 4xxx resolution that it starts. and it's not a Whrligig specific thing as all video players on the desk top do it so I'm guessing that's why founder of Whirligig doesn't touch it. It's an issue on Virtual Desktop and competitors as well.

I have an RTX 3070 Ti, and I have stuttering and choppiness at 8192x4096 in Whirligig. I noticed that with my GPU the video decoder isn't anywhere near 100%. It may not be an issue with how fast the GPU can decode the video, but rather an issue with PCI-Express bandwidth or memory bandwidth (that's a lot of data to be handling).

I'm planning on doing a test to see if VP9 video at 8192x4096 plays back smoother than H.265 video at the same resolution. It took a long time to encode the video, so hopefully it works out well. I already know that H.264 (AVC) plays back smoother at high resolutions than H.265, but I didn't want to bother testing with a codec that is significantly inferior to H.265 and VP9.