Thanks for your reactive and detailed answer Holger ! I’m currently running DT 3.0 rc2, more precisely commit 680668c58a1415322b89af0a689cb792e747bd6f
I’m a little bit behind, but since we’re running in the final stage of issuing 3.0, most of the effort at the moment is being put on translations documentations etc so I don’t think any performance improvement is to be expected when 3.0 will be out. Cheers > On 19 Dec 2019, at 20:46, Holger Wünsche <[email protected]> > wrote: > > HI, > > > > looking at the output from darktable it seems your the masked modules are a > lot faster than on my system. Which version of darktable do you use? Your > demosaic and defringe are comparable to mine, the others are just > significantly faster so we didn't really paid a lot of attention to them. > > The numbers from time (real, user, sys) are just the the total runtime (real) > and the amount spend in the application (User) and the time spend in the > operating system (sys). The last two are the sum across all cores, so having > 8 cors calculate 1 second will result in 8s in user-time. > > The time from 9.5 to 17.8 is almost the same for me and I think it is the > time needed to compress the png (but I don't know ;) ). > > > > Regards, > > Holger > > On 12/19/19 8:19 PM, Sébastien Chaurin wrote: >> For the sake of benchmarking my system, I also used your files and command >> from your email : >> >> $ time darktable-cli 2019-11-23T23_23_35+0100_7871.arw >> 2019-11-23T23_23_35+0100_7871.arw.xmp 2019-11-23T23_23_35+0100_7871.png >> --core --library :memory: -d opencl -d perf 2>&1 > dt_log.txt >> >> Although it took less than 18s, I’m not to understand the other numbers : >> >> real 0m17.835s >> user 0m48.886s >> sys 0m3.417s >> >> And from the log it created I have : >> >> 9.516693 [dev_process_export] pixel pipeline processing took 8.120 secs >> (37.632 CPU) >> 17.805166 [opencl_summary_statistics] device 'AMD Radeon Pro 580 Compute >> Engine' (0): 295 out of 295 events were successful and 0 events lost >> >> Does this mean it took 17.8 - 9.51 just to write the png file on the disk ? >> >> I find in my case that by far the 2 modules that used the most power were >> demoniac and defringe. Not sure why this does not seem to be the case for >> others… Apart from those 2, yes tone curve 3 and exposure 1/2 were slightly >> higher that the others… >> >> CPU and GPU were reasonably loaded while exporting but not 100%. >> Full log is attached. >> >> I’d be happy for someone to enlighten me on these results :) > > ____________________________________________________________________________ > darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to > [email protected] ____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to [email protected]
