I have now got a new graphics card, a Nvidia GeForce 610 with 2 GB memory.
It is capable of using OpenCL, so I thought I would get a real performance
boost. But the fact is that I see no improvement at all. Instead it seems
to slow things down. I started Darktable with "darktable -d opencl -d perf"
and then I opened an image with certain things done to it, among them
Profiled Denoise. Simply zooming the image to 100% (middle click) takes
around 6.5 seconds with OpenCL, and 2.5 seconds without! This looks very
weird to me. I also had a look in the manual, in the section about
optimizing OpenCL. Most things there seem to be about AMD cards, and the
things I tried did not have any effect.
Here is the terminal output for the zoom with OpenCL enabled:
---
[dev] took 0,000 secs (0,000 CPU) to load the image.
[pixelpipe_process] [full] using device 0
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,003 secs (0,004 CPU) initing base buffer [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,005 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `white balance'
[full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,004 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `highlight
reconstruction' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,032 secs (0,020 CPU) processing `demosaic' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 6,114 secs (2,636 CPU) processing `denoise (profiled)'
[full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,256 secs (0,152 CPU) processing `lens correction'
[full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,018 secs (0,004 CPU) processing `base curve' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,010 secs (0,008 CPU) processing `input color
profile' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,033 secs (0,004 CPU) processing `sharpen' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,027 secs (0,016 CPU) processing `output color
profile' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,005 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `overexposed' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,013 secs (0,016 CPU) processing `gamma' [full]
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0004 seconds in [Write Image (from host to
device)]
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0024 seconds in whitebalance_1ui
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0027 seconds in highlights_1f
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0075 seconds in ppg_demosaic_green
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0177 seconds in ppg_demosaic_redblue
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0057 seconds in border_interpolate
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0081 seconds in denoiseprofile_precondition
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0032 seconds in denoiseprofile_init
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,9002 seconds in denoiseprofile_dist
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,3109 seconds in denoiseprofile_horiz
[opencl_profiling] spent 3,3197 seconds in denoiseprofile_vert
[opencl_profiling] spent 1,4256 seconds in denoiseprofile_accu
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0108 seconds in denoiseprofile_finish
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0075 seconds in [Copy Image (on device)]
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0120 seconds in [Write Buffer (from host to
device)]
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,1920 seconds in lens_distort_lanczos3
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0160 seconds in basecurve
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0075 seconds in colorin
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0107 seconds in sharpen_hblur
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0082 seconds in sharpen_vblur
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0118 seconds in sharpen_mix
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0247 seconds in colorout
[opencl_profiling] spent 0,0081 seconds in [Read Image (from device to
host)]
[opencl_profiling] spent 6,3135 seconds totally in command queue (with 0
events missing)
[dev_process_image] pixel pipeline processing took 6,621 secs (2,972 CPU)
---
And here is the same without OpenCL:
---
[dev] took 0,000 secs (0,000 CPU) to load the image.
[pixelpipe_process] [full] using device -1
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,004 secs (0,008 CPU) initing base buffer [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `white balance'
[full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `highlight
reconstruction' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,018 secs (0,036 CPU) processing `demosaic' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 2,312 secs (4,556 CPU) processing `denoise (profiled)'
[full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,222 secs (0,420 CPU) processing `lens correction'
[full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,008 secs (0,016 CPU) processing `base curve' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,013 secs (0,016 CPU) processing `input color
profile' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,028 secs (0,040 CPU) processing `sharpen' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,023 secs (0,028 CPU) processing `output color
profile' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,004 secs (0,004 CPU) processing `overexposed' [full]
[dev_pixelpipe] took 0,004 secs (0,008 CPU) processing `gamma' [full]
[dev_process_image] pixel pipeline processing took 2,741 secs (5,236 CPU)
---
To me it looks like when using OpenCL, everything is first done in the CPU,
then redone in the GPU? That can't be very effective. Any ideas, Am I doing
something wrong?
Hans Petter
http://hpbirkeland.com
2014-04-07 10:52 GMT+02:00 Hans Petter Birkeland <[email protected]>:
> Ok, thank you. Then I'll probably go for this, and I might also consider
> getting a better graphics card.
> Den 7. apr. 2014 10:49 skrev "Rob Z. Smith" <[email protected]> følgende:
>
>> I used to run a 1920x1200 screen on dt on Core 2 Duo and it was
>> absolutely fine for speed. I did have a mid level graphics card in the box
>> though which would have speeded things up. I've since swapped the
>> processor out for a quad core which ran marginally but not noticeably
>> faster and a modern graphics card which made a larger difference but it was
>> plenty quick enough in its original state at the larger resolution.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rgds,
>>
>> Rob.
>>
>> *From:* Hans Petter Birkeland [mailto:[email protected]]
>> *Sent:* 06 April 2014 10:05
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Cc:* darktable-users
>> *Subject:* Re: [Darktable-users] Screen resolution and Darktable
>>
>>
>>
>> But then there is no point in a bigger screen anyway...
>>
>> Den 6. apr. 2014 01:26 skrev <[email protected]> følgende:
>>
>> You can limit the maximum displayed (and processed, as far as I know)
>> pixel dimensions in the global options, so no need to limit your screen
>> size for that reason. :)
>>
>> On 2014-04-05 [email protected] wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> > just a quick question. When working in Darktable, how much of a picture
>> is
>> > processed every time one adjusts something? Is it the whole file or just
>> > the visible pixels? I mean, will it be slower on a bigger screen with
>> > higher resolution?
>> >
>> > I use a somewhat old computer, with a Intel Core 2 Duo processor and
>> > 1366x768 screen resolution. Darktable is working all right on it, but I
>> > can't risk it to be slower. I am thinking about getting a 1920x1080
>> screen,
>> > but if that means more data is being processed and things are going
>> slower
>> > then maybe I shouldn't. Whart do you think?
>> >
>> > Hans Petter
>> >
>> > http://hpbirkeland.com
>> >
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Darktable-users mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Darktable-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
>>
>> This email is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you
>> are not the addressee, please delete the email and do not use it in any
>> way. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are
>> solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the
>> company. NHBC reserves the right to monitor all email communications. The
>> recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of
>> viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any
>> virus transmitted by this email. NHBC, the National House-Building Council,
>> is limited by guarantee in England, No 320784. Registered address: NHBC
>> House, Davy Avenue, Knowlhill, Milton Keynes MK5 8FP. NHBC is authorised by
>> the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct
>> Authority and Prudential Regulation Authority. NHBC Building Control
>> Services Ltd, registered by guarantee in England with Company No. 01952969.
>> Registered address: NHBC House, Davy Avenue, Knowlhill, Milton Keynes MK5
>> 8FP. NHBC Services Ltd registered by guarantee in England, No 03067703.
>> Registered address: NHBC House, Davy Avenue, Knowlhill, Milton Keynes MK5
>> 8FP. If you make a claim under a Buildmark policy your personal details
>> will be stored and processed in accordance with the Data Protection Act.
>> Your personal details may be passed to others involved with your claim such
>> as the original builder, or a consultant or remedial works contractor that
>> we may employ in connection with your claim(s) and matter ancillary to your
>> claim(s). Other than disclosure provided for in this statement, we will not
>> pass any data about you to any other party without your permission unless
>> we are required to do so by law.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Put Bad Developers to Shame
>> Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous Integration
>> Continuously Automate Build, Test & Deployment
>> Start a new project now. Try Jenkins in the cloud.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/13600_Cloudbees_APR
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Darktable-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Put Bad Developers to Shame
Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous Integration
Continuously Automate Build, Test & Deployment
Start a new project now. Try Jenkins in the cloud.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/13600_Cloudbees
_______________________________________________
Darktable-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
