hi, how much do you trust your numbers? they look very weird to me. such a speedup sounds more like one is running single threaded :)
did you run it a couple of times one after the other? to rule out disk prefetching etc? using the minimum time of three consecutive runs may be a good indication. do you have any detailed logs where the time goes (i.e. which dt module)? i mean the detailed outputs of dt, or maybe a run through the kernel's perf? you sure the dt version is exactly the same? you didn't recompile? cheers, jo On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 1:34 AM, Matthias Bodenbinder <matth...@bodenbinder.de> wrote: > Hi, > > I have upgraded my PC to newest chipset and CPU: Kaby Lake, Z270 with > i7-7700K. > > Out of curiosity I did a kernel benchmark. Comparing darktable performance > with kernel 3.16.0-4-amd64 and 4.9.0-1-amd64. I use the following command to > run darktable: > darktable-cli test.CR2 test.jpg --core -d perf -d opencl > > The results are surprising for me. Kernel 4.9 very much outperformance kernel > 3.16. Here are the results with and without opencl (using a Geforce GTX750TI): > > kernel 3.16 kernel 4.9 > with opencl 16 s 9 s > without opencl 120 s 23 s > > Without opencl, that is with pure CPU performance, the difference is a factor > of 5! > > Why is that? What am I missing? I can hardly believe that kernel 4.9 is so > much faster. > > Matthias > > PS > I have also posted this message to debian.user and I know that it is probably > better placed into a kernel developer list. But may be some DT expert knows > the answer or can eventually verify my results. > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > darktable developer mailing list > to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org > ___________________________________________________________________________ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
