stuttering and crashing with high-bitrate 4K

[macv 2]

Setup: 
W10 server -> NVidia Shield (2019 cigar version) player

File:

4K MKV HEVC, 49.6Mbps video, Overall bit rate 64.0 Mb/s

It plays for less than a minute before stuttering and soon afterwards crashing the Shield Emby app.  I turned off subs to minimize the chances of transcoding.  I haven't had issues with lower bitrates 4K files (maybe <1/4 of this one).

I just got a fat Wifi6 router too and WiFi speeds have sustained 400+Mbps WAN so intranet should be even faster.

Anyone else experienced this?  I'm wondering if the bottleneck is the Shield (or the Android in it) because everywhere else seems quite capable. My PC is relatively recent and can play multiple 4K videos locally.

Edited October 29, 2021 by macv

[Luke 42078]

HI, is it direct playing?

[Carlo 4561]

Hi, can you show us the media info section for this file from the detail screen?

That would give us a better idea what this media file looks like.

[macv 2]

videocamVideo

Title 4K HEVC HDR10

 

Codec HEVC

ProfileMain 10

Level 153

Resolution 3840x2160

Aspect Ratio16:9

Interlaced No

Framerate 23.976

Bitrate 63,998 kbps

Video Range HDR10

Color Primaries bt2020

Color Space bt2020nc

Color Transfer smpte2084

Bit Depth10 bit

Pixel Format yuv420p10le

Reference Frames 1

diotrackAudio

 

Language English

Codec TRUEHD

Layout7.1

Channels 8 ch

Sample Rate 48,000 Hz

Bit Depth 24 bit

Default Yes

Edited October 29, 2021 by macv

[macv 2]

I guess transcoding is always a danger. How do I confirm what it's doing?

[Carlo 4561]

When playing on the Shield TV is it direct playing?
Click the cog menu and select stats for nerds to see this info.
Can also long press the center/ok button to bring this up/remove it.

[macv 2]

Thx so I tried again and this time, the stuttering starts immediately and I can't even get to the nerd info screen. The Emby app crashes and the Shield homescreen is also unresponsive. I ended up power cycling the Shield more often than not when that happens.

I then tried from the (Roku) TV's Emby app and this time it played smoothly.  However, Nerd stats shows transcoding down to 1080p, H264.

The Shield was probably getting transcoded 4K is my guess.

So my PC can transcode down to 1080p with no issues. I think it can do 4K no issues also so is the bottleneck with the Shield?  I'm probably just going to watch it on the PC instead of 1080p on the TV but just curious how the overall ecosystem works in case I get a lot more of these types of files and need to make it work.

[rbjtech 5284]

9 hours ago, macv said:

Setup: 
W10 server -> NVidia Shield (2019 cigar version) player

This is likely your issue - the non Pro Shield still has issues playing high bitrate 4K files - it's a bug in the hardware causing memory leaks and it's crippled 32bit OS, thus it crashes when it runs out of memory after playing for a short while.  Same issue using Pl*x  - it's the hardware that is at fault I'm afraid.

 

[ebr 16184]

Hi.  In our app there is a setting called buffer size in the playback settings.  Try reducing its value and it may help this.  But rbj is correct that there is some sort of memory management issue on the "tube" Shield.

[Gilgamesh_48 1240]

I suggest not using "high bitrate" files the improvement is marginal, at best, and the load is quite high. I do not know anyone that can see any real difference between normal bitrate files and the huge ones that some people use. Not one of my movies is above 5gb in total size and most are under 2tb. I have tested other settings that produce high bitrates and large files but I see no important differences. I just use settings that produce a file of 1.5 to 2.5 tb and the resulting files are quite viewable and even my daughter and granddaughters have no complaints.

The trick is to produce files that look good to you and your most critical viewers. Once you have that figured out you will, probably, end up with your files eating less disk space and looking just as good as the ones that hog excessive disk space.

[rbjtech 5284]

31 minutes ago, Gilgamesh_48 said:

I suggest not using "high bitrate" files the improvement is marginal, at best, and the load is quite high. I do not know anyone that can see any real difference between normal bitrate files and the huge ones that some people use. Not one of my movies is above 5gb in total size and most are under 2tb. I have tested other settings that produce high bitrates and large files but I see no important differences. I just use settings that produce a file of 1.5 to 2.5 tb and the resulting files are quite viewable and even my daughter and granddaughters have no complaints.

The trick is to produce files that look good to you and your most critical viewers. Once you have that figured out you will, probably, end up with your files eating less disk space and looking just as good as the ones that hog excessive disk space.

With respect, there is a noticeable difference between 4K remux files vs compressed 'stream' copies, yet alone the bitrates you are suggesting.  HD Audio is also a significant part of the storage used on the UHD disk.

If you are happy with 4K @ 720p bitrates - then that's fine but please do not suggest to others that they will not notice any difference... 

[Gilgamesh_48 1240]

4 minutes ago, rbjtech said:

With respect, there is a noticeable difference between 4K remux files vs compressed 'stream' copies, yet alone the bitrates you are suggesting.  HD Audio is also a significant part of the storage used on the UHD disk.

If you are happy with 4K @ 720p bitrates - then that's fine but please do not suggest to others that they will not notice any difference... 

I also believe that 4K is overrated. I believe that 4K and other extreme "enhancements" are created for the purpose of making older hardware and software obsolete and thereby making money for many people. I believe that the differences people see are actually mostly just a desire to justify "bigger = better" or "More expensive = better."  But each person has to make their own choice.

You actually have no right to tell me to not give advice to others. You are perfectly welcome to offer any advice you want and I may agree or disagree but I should not tell you to shut up as you did me.

I can be and often am wrong. I have the right to be wrong. You have the right to be wrong but neither of us has the right to wrong the other.

"The constitution guarantees people the right to be wrong but it does not guarantee anyone the right to do wrong." 

[lightsout 156]

I went through the same issue when I bought the Shield Tube version. Tried many things, with Emby and also Plex and Kodi and in the end concluded that the device has limitations that the pro does not. I returned mine.

[Deathsquirrel 745]

2 hours ago, Gilgamesh_48 said:

I suggest not using "high bitrate" files the improvement is marginal, at best, and the load is quite high. I do not know anyone that can see any real difference between normal bitrate files and the huge ones that some people use. Not one of my movies is above 5gb in total size and most are under 2tb. I have tested other settings that produce high bitrates and large files but I see no important differences. I just use settings that produce a file of 1.5 to 2.5 tb and the resulting files are quite viewable and even my daughter and granddaughters have no complaints.

The trick is to produce files that look good to you and your most critical viewers. Once you have that figured out you will, probably, end up with your files eating less disk space and looking just as good as the ones that hog excessive disk space.

It is absolutely impossible to cut a 20-50GB BR or 50-100GB UHDBR to 2-5GB without significant loss of video quality.  The results may be 'fine' but they are not indistinguishable from the original material.  If you find them visually identical then one or more of these is true:

• Your TV is of very poor quality
• Your TV is too small for your viewing distance
• Your TV is very badly calibrated
• You aren't paying attention
• Your eyesight is poor

I generally don't see good video quality at HALF the original bitrate, especially in dark scenes, let alone after eliminating 90% of the source data.

Edited October 29, 2021 by Deathsquirrel

[Carlo 4561]

I think you can reduce a 50Mb down to around 15Mb with a good 2 pass encoding if done well and keep 95% of the visual quality. Plenty good enough for even the most discriminatingly video watcher.

That also allows you to discard audio and subtitle tracks that won't be needed or replaced by srt files as well.  Personally, I don't need 5 different audio tracks in 2 or three languages. I'll normally keep a 5.1 & 7.1 and create a stereo track if not already there so I always have a fallback audio track to keep from transcoding because of audio.

That gives you a file approximately 1/3 the original size which usually will stream a lot easier over wifi or broadband.

 

[Spaceboy 2573]

i have never been able to convert/compress and find a quality i am happy with. the problem is the depth of the blacks, i always find it too blocky

[macv 2]

12 hours ago, rbjtech said:

This is likely your issue - the non Pro Shield still has issues playing high bitrate 4K files - it's a bug in the hardware causing memory leaks and it's crippled 32bit OS, thus it crashes when it runs out of memory after playing for a short while.  Same issue using Pl*x  - it's the hardware that is at fault I'm afraid.

 

Thanks, I'm not sure if the bug is fixable with a future firmware update but good to know!  I had no intention of playing games or serving Pl*x so went with Cigar for the 4K upscaling feature on lower res content.

Pro vs Cigar differences for reference: https://www.androidcentral.com/nvidia-shield-pro-vs-standard

Edited October 29, 2021 by macv

[macv 2]

Re: high vs low bitrates for 4K (and importantly HDR), this particular file was only available in this size, total ~40-50GB. I would normally nab the common ~4GB version if available.

I have seen 2-4GB files of similar length that looked awesome. For those who haven't, consider the possibility that the compression settings or codec at the time weren't optimal.  I have seen bad ones also so it's a sign of inconsistent levels of compression settings mastery out there.

Edited October 29, 2021 by macv

[clarkss12 304]

I tried to see a difference in the 2019 super bowl being streamed in 4k........

 

 

[justinrh 260]

15 hours ago, cayars said:

Click the cog menu and select stats for nerds to see this info.
Can also long press the center/ok button to bring this up/remove it.

Whaaaat?  That's awesome!

Edited October 29, 2021 by justinrh

[Deathsquirrel 745]

5 hours ago, cayars said:

I think you can reduce a 50Mb down to around 15Mb with a good 2 pass encoding if done well and keep 95% of the visual quality. Plenty good enough for even the most discriminatingly video watcher.

That also allows you to discard audio and subtitle tracks that won't be needed or replaced by srt files as well.  Personally, I don't need 5 different audio tracks in 2 or three languages. I'll normally keep a 5.1 & 7.1 and create a stereo track if not already there so I always have a fallback audio track to keep from transcoding because of audio.

That gives you a file approximately 1/3 the original size which usually will stream a lot easier over wifi or broadband.

In my testing, dark scenes almost always end up looking like crap if you do this, but to each their own.

[Spaceboy 2573]

7 hours ago, Deathsquirrel said:

In my testing, dark scenes almost always end up looking like crap if you do this, but to each their own.

glad someone else agrees as fundamentally i obviously like the idea of saving space where there is no impact on quality. but despite several efforts at various times in the last few years i have never found a profile that doesnt result in media that doesnt make me wince when watching dark scenes. thats not to mention certain files that inexplicably end up bigger as well as worse quality post conversion. and with 10k+ movies i just do not have the time to do anything bespoke for each conversion, i need a one size fits all approach that will be guaranteed to work without me checking output.

most recently i am trying tdarr, which i really like for the file watching and processing capability. but all i am doing is removing all subtitle tracks and all non english audio tracks. i tried a sample of h265 conversions again but remain dissatified. i would love to be convinced otherwise/shown i am doing it wrong as i have the hardware to do the conversions and 400Tb of media for processing so the potential for quite a lot of space saving...

[Carlo 4561]

There is always an impact on quality if doing a conversion.  No two ways about that.  The question is, can you do a conversion that gives you a visual quality you can live with/enjoy while giving some kind of saving (bandwidth/storage) to make it worthwhile?

My primary display is a 75" Samsung so it's decent size to notice differences in quality. Obviously the bigger the display the more obvious flaws are.
Some movies are tough to convert and get an outcome you like while others hardly show any quality difference. Movies that are dark in general or favor a "grain" to the picture can easily get a "banding" issue if you aren't careful or just won't give a good compression ratio (grain) to always make it worth it for them.

If you're movies are already HEVC there is probably no point in trying to reprocess those.  If you have AVC or mpeg2 codecs you can save a lot of space converting those to HEVC.
If use convert to HEVC 10 bit the dark scene type media isn't a big a problem as with 8 bit. But converting to 10 bit may not be worth it depending on the clients connecting to your server.

[Spaceboy 2573]

2 hours ago, cayars said:

 The question is, can you do a conversion that gives you a visual quality you can live with/enjoy while giving some kind of saving (bandwidth/storage) to make it worthwhile?

i think the answer to that for me is, perhaps but i don't have the time or the inclination to do so. i'd rather throw the cash at more hard disks.

but that is a helpful confirmation of my position and i shall let tdarr loose only working on audio and subs

[macv 2]

Re: black levels, are yall watching on OLED or LCD?  LCD will cover up some of the subtleties in the darker levels.

It's been many moons since I went down the rabbit hole of video compression (even implemented parts of it in school) but if you're into that stuff, can look for those specific forums for best practices. At least on LCD, 4K HDR on H.265 I've seen at 2GB/hour (~4GB a movie) were more than close enough to the best available source for me.