2 ms·

I've done a bit of fiddling around with it and definitely holding back judgement for now, seems like the 1 and 2 step images are WAY more coherent than LCM, but

I've done a bit of fiddling around with it and definitely holding back judgement for now, seems like the 1 and 2 step images are WAY more coherent than LCM, but the images are kinda trash for any kind of prompt complexity so you start to have to use more steps, and since the individual steps take the same amount of time (I think there's a specific sampler for this which may be faster & better?) by the time you start prompting details you end up using 4 steps and the perf is about the same as LCM, and that breaks down the same way as you start going for more complexity (text, coherent bg details etc) because you end up needing 10-15 steps and at that point you're going to get a much better result from full-fat SDXL x dpmpp3msdee (lol) Curious to see the bigbrain people tackle this over the next few days and wring all the perf out of it, maybe samplers tailored to this model will give a notable boost.

radicality 3y ago
Are you finding dpm++ 3M SDE better than dpm++ 2M SDE in sdxl? Afaik the second order (2M) version is the recommended one to use for guided sampling vs the 3rd order one. From here: https://huggingface.co/docs/diffusers/v0.23.1/en/api/schedulers/multistep_dpm_solver#diffusers.DPMSolverMultistepScheduler https://huggingface.co/docs/diffusers/v0.23.1/en/api/schedul... > It is recommended to set solver_order to 2 for guide sampling, and solver_order=3 for unconditional sampling.
- Filligree 3y ago
  It might be placebo, but I find 3M better for upscaling, when I usually set CFG quite low and use a generic prompt that doesn't describe any localised element of the picture. Which is what it's meant for, I suppose.
- thot_experiment 3y ago
  In my tests it's basically been 50/50, i probably did ~40 or so comparisons when i was testing samplers and i felt like there were a couple that seemed really good on the 3rd order one, but idfk, it was very very close, I don't know if I saw a single gen where one of the two was bad but the other wasn't.

radicality 3y ago

Are you finding dpm++ 3M SDE better than dpm++ 2M SDE in sdxl? Afaik the second order (2M) version is the recommended one to use for guided sampling vs the 3rd order one. From here: https://huggingface.co/docs/diffusers/v0.23.1/en/api/schedulers/multistep_dpm_solver#diffusers.DPMSolverMultistepScheduler https://huggingface.co/docs/diffusers/v0.23.1/en/api/schedul... > It is recommended to set solver_order to 2 for guide sampling, and solver_order=3 for unconditional sampling.

Filligree 3y ago
It might be placebo, but I find 3M better for upscaling, when I usually set CFG quite low and use a generic prompt that doesn't describe any localised element of the picture. Which is what it's meant for, I suppose.
thot_experiment 3y ago
In my tests it's basically been 50/50, i probably did ~40 or so comparisons when i was testing samplers and i felt like there were a couple that seemed really good on the 3rd order one, but idfk, it was very very close, I don't know if I saw a single gen where one of the two was bad but the other wasn't.