So far I’ve used version 2.6.4, the other versions 3.0.x were all slower.
The 3.10 version is not as fast as the 2.6.4 version,
it is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaster! (approx. 2x as fast). Very good!
My system: Ryzen 5 2400g, RTX 2060.
What I noticed: If I minimize the GUI, then about 10% less CPU is used! The GUI is always flickering slightly, it seems like it is constantly repainting and using some system resources to do so.
Previously “Graphics_1” (Task Manager) was used, now CUDA for about 50%. Possibly there is still room for improvement, the GPU still doesn’t seem to be fully utilized.
1 Like
I have a GTX 1660, and the speed is mediocre for me too.
OK. Fair point. Bleeding edge. But there should be reasonable standards even for latest tech. I mean if you really want to make an argument for a bleeding edge being a privilege to use. I can make an counter argument that being beta testers for Topaz team is equal payment. Bugs for feedback. Feedback for bugs. Fair deal in my view.
On the other hand if its going to be charged at premium rate as finished commercially ready product, than it should reflect the advertisement as such. I’m not being controversial here. That is how the practice was done until fairly recently. In it in recent times with digital version of software only and subscription models that trend has shifted in rapid release cycle to a captive audience. There was rapid release cycle in the past. But it was called, alpha, beta, beta 2, beta 3 etc. We have the same thing today, except the beta part is pronounced silent. Bleeding edge technology is fine, but reliably should be a priority.
1 Like
Or you can look at it other way. Old perpetual license meant you were buying a finish product. Now you get one 1 year license to participate in beta program. Seriously, there should be no company that releases a new major program for at least a year, because that is how long it takes to actually make a product that is out of the beta phase. Releasing a version 3, rewritten from scratch is not a major new release its a beta program version 1 of a new product that is far from prime time ready. As the Topaz stated officially the old version up to version 2.6.4 was benefiting from longer testing and optimization process. Version 3 is beta in all but name. And its really more like version 1 of a new program inspired by what they have done with Topaz Video Enhance up to version 2.6.4.
The fact that Topaz team build the old version with some limitations that they realized will limit progress forward and therefore decided to rewrite the app from scratch is a cost for the Topaz, it should not be passed down to consumer. Once version 3 or however you want to call it has been properly tested and is stable, they could release it. Otherwise you are not paying 1 year for upgrades, you are paying 1 year to participate in beta program.
5 Likes
Mediocre is being generous. To me it’s unusable.
1 Like
“Only” 7.6fps??? 
The best I get is 12.5fps with my RTX3060 (12GB), upscaling 1 video 2x (1280x720 → 2560x1440) with preset Artemis/Proteus, GPU load about 80%, GPU memory at 2.7/12GB.
However when I do same thing with 1 video upscaling 1,33X (1920x1080 → 2560x1440) speed drops to 4.34fps with same preset as above.
To run 2 videos in parallel with the RTX3060 is possible but not recommended, because processing time is more than double the time whe running both in sequence.
I’ll test more odd upscale ratios in order to find out which scaling perfoms best.
Is Chronos Fast used if you’re not changing the FPS rate? The Frame Interpolation filter (the only place I see Chronos Fast) is only active if I change the FPS. I do use that if I’m changing the frame rate and it didn’t seem unduly slow on the prior release.
Thanks; I hope so too. I’m not feeling too good about having just paid for a license renewal to a release I can’t use. I know this is very complex software but I feel like I’m beta testing it. It’s not exactly inexpensive.
Chronos Fast is only used if you change the frame rate.
That’s what I thought and I’m not doing that.
Ok I should add that if you are using a 4k source and changing the frame rate by 2x you will see it’s more than 4x slower than on the 3.0.12 release - specific to GTX cards.
This is all true. The problem with TVAI is not that is was being developed, but that they released it too early. Then compounded their mistake by dropping support for v2.6.4 (VEAI). They should have kept v3 to the BETA TESTER group.
Or you can look at it the other way. 
Eventually (now) TVAI has overtaken VEAI in performance (drastically even). And after a few months of growing pains, I finally no longer feel the need to go back to using VEAI. Going from 1.8 fps to 7 fps is quite a stretch to ignore.
However, TVAI is still very much beta. Stabilization is outright broken, as well as motion deblur. Those 2 options should have been disabled for the release version.
All-in-all, I feel Topaz took a goodwill hit with the v3 stunt. Their commercial guys were clearly not in sync with the tech folks. I still feel confident in the dev team, though, as I see them working very hard on improving things – and they actually have, significantly. So, I’m still happy with my decision to extend my licence for another year (back in October).
7 Likes
I would love to know what changed between 3.0(.12) and 3.1 to give such a big performance boost tbh. Wonder if there’s more things in that specific area that can be done too, that will just take more time
My cursory understanding of what suraj explained (don’t shoot me if I am wrong), was that they reworked the entire Tensor core logic (primarily to fix performance on 40xx cards); and in the process actually initially caused a major performance drop on 3080 series card (or had their Tensor cores flat-out not work at all). Then, with the advent of 3.1.0.4.b, they finally worked out the kinks. And also simply optimized TVAI to take much better use of your CPU and GPU.
I understand the points you are making and you’re not wrong, I simply have a different viewpoint, and I know I am giving Topaz a lot of slack. I don’t think of using TVAI as a privilege, more like ‘breaking new ground’, and I don’t mind paying a price to be part of it. Anyone who feels slighted by Topaz’s approach has every right to complain about it, of course.
1 Like
Process 2 versions in a row of the same 30-minute program with quality origin E.B.U European Broadcasting Union.
The two tracks in AfterEffects 2023, I am adjusting the tracks according to quality criteria with a mix of 0-100.
I process the mix and adjust audio and color.
With version 3.1 the tracks are out of sync in frames on the Ae timeline.
Original 6 Gb avi 4.2.2 10 bit in the process gives a result of 35 GB.
Regards
Uploading: image.png…
Uploading: Captura de pantalla 2023-01-19 234328.png…
And ask for their money back!
1 Like
Sure!
Thanks for the info. I’ll be staying on 3.0.12 until they fix this (if they ever fix it).
1 Like
That’s true. I don’t know how much speed has increased in 3.1 releases. I haven’t tested it myself, but some people on forums here claim its slower and some that it’s better than the other 3. something releases. I can’t verify. Probably its specific to hardware. Some I’m sure are getting an increase in speed and some probably are not. So still work to do for the Topaz team.
Stabilization from what I’ve seen even when advertised as finished tends to fall apart with some types of footage. Mainly with fast movements of rolling shutter effect with complex shapes. Some parts of the image sheer, some change perspective, some wobble, etc. Notoriously difficult to fix. I know The Foundry - Rolling Shutter plugin was released some ten years ago, for Nuke and After Effects to solve the problem of difficult tracking and camera solve with CMOS rolling shutter footage. Sooner or later they would break down as well. And that was with no AI, some 10 year ago. It would be nice if Topaz could surpass that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zt0u9hsPuZY
Also stabilization I think is something we have in many other programs so it’s not so much of a big deal but the ability to fill in blank frames from zooming in to stabilize footage is very useful. I know Mocha Pro can do that, but one has to track and stabilize manually first.
Having one automated option to fix rolling shutter and stabilize footage and fill in the frame would be amazing. I hope Topaz can work that out.
The same is true for their motion de-blur filter. That would be great on normal 25 or 24 fps footage with motion blur. If one could first remove motion blur and then slow it down with slow motion AI that would solve the major problem of shooting normal 180 degree shutter rule footage and later slow it down with no classical motion blur effect. But I think there will be a while before we see that one is working properly.
All-in-all yes, I think it would have been great if they kept improving 2.6.4 version while working on 3.x in beta.
3 Likes
