TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC

Dashcam quality on HW3 FW 2019.7.106

Discussion in 'Model 3' started by sumitkgarg, May 10, 2019.

  1. sumitkgarg

    sumitkgarg Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    673
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    I know that HW3 firmwares aren't fully baked yet, but here is a sample of the video quality from my recently delivered Model 3. Details like license plates aren't fully legible yet. Hopefully will get better soon.

    Btw - can anyone on a newer FW for HW3 share their Dashcam clip quality? Thanks!

    Youtube link:
     
  2. derotam

    derotam Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2018
    Messages:
    456
    Location:
    Oak Hill, VA
    A more interesting datapoint would be to tell us what the resolution and frame rate of the dashcam video is.

    The video as placed on youtube is not the same resolution as what you uploaded. That looks horrible.
     
    • Like x 1
  3. sumitkgarg

    sumitkgarg Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    673
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    It is horrible when played directly as well - hence my post.

    Codec info:
    Codec: MPEG-H Part2/HEVC (H.265) (hvc1)
    Video resolution: 1280x960
    Buffer dimensions: 1280x960
    Frame rate: 36.019028
    Decoded format: Planar 4:2:0 YUV
     
  4. derotam

    derotam Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2018
    Messages:
    456
    Location:
    Oak Hill, VA
    Ok good, just wanted to make sure nothing changed there...I don't think mine has every been that bad, I'll have to look again when I get home.
     
  5. ngogas

    ngogas Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2018
    Messages:
    1,426
    Location:
    Utah
    Can't tell the difference between this video hw3 vs video with hw2.5. Do they really replaced the camera or just the computer for hw3?
     
  6. Zirak

    Zirak Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2018
    Messages:
    259
    Location:
    Canada
    no sensors or cameras are replaced. Just the MCU.
     
  7. M109Rider

    M109Rider Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2018
    Messages:
    656
    Location:
    Kitchener, Ontario
    Wouldn’t the difference between HW 3 and 2.5 eventually be related to processing as opposed to video quality. ?

    The cameras aren’t changing. ...
     
  8. Zirak

    Zirak Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2018
    Messages:
    259
    Location:
    Canada
    Yeah I read somewhere on these forums that it'll process like 200 frames as opposed to 20 frames a second per camera or something like that.
     
  9. XTOTHEL

    XTOTHEL Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2019
    Messages:
    21
    Location:
    Canada
    Update to 2019.12 and you’ll be fine.
     
    • Like x 2
  10. mike95

    mike95 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2018
    Messages:
    11
    Location:
    US
    What it processes, and what it process to store on the USB are two different things. It is so powerful that it can process 60 frames per second or more, however it then processes or downscales this to 30 frames per second with additional compression for USB storage so you can make any conclusions from the quality you see on usb other than compare to video of previous cpu hardware.
     
  11. ngogas

    ngogas Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2018
    Messages:
    1,426
    Location:
    Utah
    Sounds like you shouldn’t see any changes in camera recordings.
     
  12. Knightshade

    Knightshade Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Messages:
    5,361
    Location:
    NC

    ... what?


    The cameras only record at 36 fps. At 720p. The exact resolution/speed that gets recorded by the dashcam. Nothing is being "downscaled" for USB storage at all.

    The issue with HW2.5 was that it couldn't handle 8 cameras at 36 fps (which is 288 fps, almost 50% beyond the max spec of the computer) for EAP/FSD purposes...so they had to crop images/reduce frame rates when processing the AP data.

    HW3 on the other hand can process ~2000 fps, so even all cameras at full resolution/frame rate don't use a huge % of its capacity- and it can handle much larger more complex neutral nets than HW2.x can.
     
    • Informative x 1
  13. r0xx0r

    r0xx0r Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2016
    Messages:
    329
    Location:
    CA
    What change to MCU? No, they only upgraded the APU.
     
  14. solodogg

    solodogg Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2019
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    Orlando
    Mine was the same quality on 2019.7.102 and 2019.7.105. Update to 2019.12.1.2 came down the pile last week and resolved the quality issues.

    Make sure your car is connected to WiFi at home when it’s parked overnight, and you should get 12.1.2 update soon. They are pushing to everyone quickly.
     
    • Like x 1
  15. sumitkgarg

    sumitkgarg Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    673
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    Got the 2019.12.1.2 update yesterday and the quality is good now!
     
    • Informative x 1
  16. mswlogo

    mswlogo Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2018
    Messages:
    2,781
    Location:
    MA
    Thanks for sharing this. But it looks about the same. I think the bottleneck is the USB 2.0 and they use high compression to make USB 2.0 work. Hopefully what HW3 computer “sees” is better.

    Typically if I view people’s TeslaCam videos on my phone they look pretty good on the small screen. On my large computer screens they look pretty bad. What you just posted was just “ok” on my phone.

    It seems to vary wildly too. Certain lighting or something makes a huge difference.

    There are some videos around showing what cpu sees and they are much better.

    Maybe future HW3 optimized code or other code changes improve it.
     
    • Disagree x 1
  17. Knightshade

    Knightshade Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Messages:
    5,361
    Location:
    NC
    Nope.

    USB2 is many many many times faster an interface than this feature needs.

    Each camera is recording at 0.5MB/sec.

    That's 1.5MB/sec for 3 cameras.

    USB2 can do 60 MB/sec. 40 times more than the car needs.

    Whatever compression they're using is not to accommodate USB2.
     
    • Like x 1
  18. mswlogo

    mswlogo Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2018
    Messages:
    2,781
    Location:
    MA
    #18 mswlogo, May 13, 2019
    Last edited: May 13, 2019
    I come out to 3.5 MB/sec (uncompressed 8bit color 3 cameras)
    USB2 theoretical limit might be 60 MB/sec but in practice it's half that.
    So now we are down to 8.5x "more than it needs".

    Tesla may have targeted it working on lower quality USB Flash drives as well.
    Not sure how USB controllers work but it might need to reserve bandwidth for Music Flash drive as well.

    One thing I do know, if I try to do Music on the Flash drive my TeslaCam will often corrupt.
    If I don't use Music the TeslaCam will run fine for months.

    Could be poor compression or over compression.

    My guess is, it's partly a really crappy USB2/FAT32 driver that has poor bandwidth and then they over compress it to make it all work.
     
    • Disagree x 1
  19. chillaban

    chillaban Active Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2016
    Messages:
    3,596
    Location:
    Bay Area
    Looks to me like terrible terrible settings picked for the HEVC hardware encoder onboard. Hopefully something they can patch in software.
     
    • Like x 1
  20. Knightshade

    Knightshade Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Messages:
    5,361
    Location:
    NC
    Not sure where you got that from.

    They're actually recording at 0.5MB/sec. So 1.5MB/sec for 3 cameras.

    (hence why a 1 minute clip is 30 MB-... 60 seconds times 0.5MB per second= 30MB)

    So no, we're still at USB2 theoretical limit being 40 times more than needed. So "only" 20x is you want to cut that in half.

    I suppose they might have. But even the lowest quality ones are 5-10 times faster at writing than this application needs, so it continues to not be remotely near an actual problem.

    They don't work like that at all, so not really. Apart from which there's 2 ports independent from each other (4 technically, but the 2 rears don't have independent data cables on the back end like the fronts do)


    And yet many others get corruption on the teslacam drive even if it's the only thing on the drive.

    Even people running SSDs, so we know it ain't the speed of the device.



    ... that sentence does not make a lot of technical sense. Drivers don't have bandwidth.... and tesla is using LINUX- both USB2 and FAT32 drivers have been mature in the LINUX Kernel since before Tesla was selling cars
     

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.
  • Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


    SUPPORT TMC