I'm running DT on an Imac 27" mid-2017 (release date) with a Kaby lake i7 4.2 ghz, turbo freq up to 4.5, 16gb of ram, SSD and the Radeon 580 pro which has 8gb of memory. The newer imac (2019) uses Coffee lake processors with an option for a i9 3.5 turbo freq 5, and 16mb of cache instead of 8 for the i7. I think they have faster memory too. At the time of buyingi could only have added more ram, or go for the Imac Pro but the price tag was quite different for a performance increase not so easy to grasp.
On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 09:38, Jochen Keil <[email protected]> wrote: > Great news Michael! > > *Now* I'm really looking forward to Christmas 😄 > > On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 9:30 AM Michael Kefeder <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> this must be improvement of DT 3.0 over 2.6.2 as I have the same "AMD >> Radeon Pro 580 Compute Engine" and am not anywhere near those numbers using >> DT 2.6.2 >> >> Very impressive work from the team behind darktable, thanks in advance >> since I haven't upgraded yet :) >> >> >> Am Fr., 20. Dez. 2019 um 09:25 Uhr schrieb Jochen Keil < >> [email protected]>: >> >>> Well, I looked at the logs again an the modules in question finish much >>> faster on your PC than on mine: >>> >>> >>> 5.494078 [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.648 secs (2.102 CPU) processed `exposure 1' >>> on GPU, blended on GPU [export] >>> 6.104177 [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.610 secs (1.767 CPU) processed `exposure 2' >>> on GPU, blended on GPU [export] >>> 8.704744 [dev_pixelpipe] took 0.690 secs (2.707 CPU) processed `tone curve >>> 3' on GPU, blended on GPU [export] >>> >>> vs >>> >>> 23,918032 [dev_pixelpipe] took 17,204 secs (41,352 CPU) processed `exposure >>> 1' on GPU, blended on GPU [export] >>> 40,646382 [dev_pixelpipe] took 16,728 secs (41,418 CPU) processed `exposure >>> 2' on GPU, blended on GPU [export] >>> 53,002052 [dev_pixelpipe] took 10,305 secs (27,939 CPU) processed `tone >>> curve 3' on GPU, blended on GPU [export] >>> >>> If that's not an improvement in DT's code I'll order an "AMD Radeon Pro 580 >>> Compute Engine" and see how it performs with my system. If that won't help >>> I can still upgrade to an i7-7700K or a comparable AMD or so.. :) >>> >>> Cheers! >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 9:02 AM Sébastien Chaurin < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Well to be honest I'm not too sure if this is an improvement in 3.0. My >>>> computer is quite new (last year) and I chose it wisely so that it would >>>> perform very well for editing picture. This was the chance for me just to >>>> look at how it compares against others. But still, I'd be curious to see >>>> the performance difference when you'll run the same export with 3.0. >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 07:37, Jochen Keil <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Sébastien, >>>>> >>>>> thank you for taking the time to perform the benchmark! >>>>> >>>>> I also re-ran my benchmarks with the masks disabled (for the exposure >>>>> & tone curve modules) and got a much better performance. >>>>> >>>>> Your results suggest that there have been some significant >>>>> improvements on this in DT 3.x, so I'm looking very much forward to this! >>>>> >>>>> Thanks again and best wishes, >>>>> >>>>> Jochen >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 11:21 PM Sébastien Chaurin < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> 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] >>>>>> >>>>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________________ >>> darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to >>> [email protected] >>> >> > ____________________________________________________________________________ > darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to > [email protected] > ____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to [email protected]
