Thanks Christian.
I sort of reached that conclusion. What i don't understand are the CPU
numbers in parentheses. What do they mean?
Atentamente,
Gonçalo Marrafa
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Roumano <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
> If we look at one of the most heavy slow module in your pipeline
> (denoise) :
>
> OpenCL
> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,443 secs (0,013 CPU) processing `denoise
> > (profiled)' [full]
> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,111 secs (0,002 CPU) processing `denoise
> > (profiled)' [full]
> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,030 secs (0,001 CPU) processing `denoise
> > (profiled)' [full]
> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,115 secs (0,001 CPU) processing `denoise
> > (profiled)' [full]
>
> It's was take 0,443+0,111+0,030+0,115 = 0,699 Second to do it with the
> opencl enable
>
>
> *without* OpenCL:
> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,752 secs (5,576 CPU) processing `denoise
> > (profiled)' [full]
> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,258 secs (1,777 CPU) processing `denoise
> > (profiled)' [full]
> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,133 secs (0,760 CPU) processing `denoise
> > (profiled)' [full]
> > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,175 secs (1,150 CPU) processing `denoise
> > (profiled)' [full]
>
> It's was take 0,752+0,258+0,133+0,175 = 1,318 Second to do it without
> opencl
>
> So it's 2 time faster with the opencl enable
>
> Also doing this with opencl, your CPU is not used (nb cycle CPU) so it's
> decharge your CPU to do another stuff like your OS is more fuild.
> This It's much more pertinant for very long export, it's much faster &
> you can continue to use your PC (try it without the opencl & you will
> see what's happen ;) )
>
>
> Bye
>
>
>
> Le mardi 29 avril 2014 à 18:25 +0200, Max Killer a écrit :
> >
> > Should have also gone to the list.
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject:
> > Re: [Darktable-users] Decode
> > performance information
> > Date:
> > Tue, 29 Apr 2014 18:24:47 +0200
> > From:
> > Max Killer
> > <[email protected]>
> > To:
> > Gonçalo Marrafa
> > <[email protected]>
> >
> >
> > On Tue 29 Apr 2014 03:17:30 PM CEST, Gonçalo Marrafa wrote:
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > I've been trying to measure my DT performance with and without OpenCL,
> > > to evaluate its benefits. My GPU is a Radeon HD 8790M and i'm on
> > > Ubuntu 14.04 64 bit. I'm doing this test because the proprietary
> > > drivers are not very stable and the open source ones are much more,
> > > but don't have OpenCL support.
> > >
> > > This is a very basic test, perhaps not a very meaningful one. If so
> > > please tell how to do it properly. I opened the same image, with a
> > > little processing, denoising, sharpening, color correction, highlight
> > > recovery, etc., in darkroom and zoom to 100% then zoom back out. I did
> > > the test with OpenCL enabled and disabled. Although i see the numbers
> > > are greater without OpenCL, i can't really understand them and would
> > > like a little help from you guys.
> > >
> > > Below are excerpts of the output of darktable -d perf:
> > >
> > > *With* OpenCL:
> > >
> > > [dev] took 0,000 secs (0,000 CPU) to load the image.
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,007 secs (0,016 CPU) initing base buffer [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,002 CPU) processing `white balance'
> > > [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,001 CPU) processing `highlight
> > > reconstruction' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,001 CPU) processing `demosaic'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,443 secs (0,013 CPU) processing `denoise
> > > (profiled)' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,111 secs (0,002 CPU) processing `denoise
> > > (profiled)' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,002 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `base curve'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,002 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `input color
> > > profile' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `vibrance'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,019 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `shadows and
> > > highlights' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,002 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `color zones'
> > > [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,003 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `tone curve'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,053 secs (0,038 CPU) processing `sharpen' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,002 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `output color
> > > profile' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `velvia' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `vignetting'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `overexposed'
> > > [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,021 secs (0,024 CPU) processing `gamma' [full]
> > > [dev_process_image] pixel pipeline processing took 0,675 secs (0,102
> CPU)
> > > [dev] took 0,000 secs (0,000 CPU) to load the image.
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,000 secs (0,000 CPU) initing base buffer [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,004 secs (0,004 CPU) processing `white balance'
> > > [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,003 secs (0,003 CPU) processing `highlight
> > > reconstruction' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,002 secs (0,001 CPU) processing `demosaic'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,030 secs (0,001 CPU) processing `denoise
> > > (profiled)' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,115 secs (0,001 CPU) processing `denoise
> > > (profiled)' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `base curve'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,002 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `input color
> > > profile' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `vibrance'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,017 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `shadows and
> > > highlights' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,002 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `color zones'
> > > [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,002 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `tone curve'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,032 secs (0,018 CPU) processing `sharpen' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,002 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `output color
> > > profile' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `velvia' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `vignetting'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,000 CPU) processing `overexposed'
> > > [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,019 secs (0,014 CPU) processing `gamma' [full]
> > > [dev_process_image] pixel pipeline processing took 0,238 secs (0,046
> CPU)
> > >
> > >
> > > And *without* OpenCL:
> > >
> > > [dev] took 0,000 secs (0,000 CPU) to load the image.
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,012 secs (0,021 CPU) initing base buffer [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,006 CPU) processing `white balance'
> > > [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,001 secs (0,004 CPU) processing `highlight
> > > reconstruction' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,010 secs (0,045 CPU) processing `demosaic'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,752 secs (5,576 CPU) processing `denoise
> > > (profiled)' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,258 secs (1,777 CPU) processing `denoise
> > > (profiled)' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,004 secs (0,019 CPU) processing `base curve'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,004 secs (0,014 CPU) processing `input color
> > > profile' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,004 secs (0,019 CPU) processing `vibrance'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,028 secs (0,105 CPU) processing `shadows and
> > > highlights' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,021 secs (0,128 CPU) processing `color zones'
> > > [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,003 secs (0,020 CPU) processing `tone curve'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,069 secs (0,153 CPU) processing `sharpen' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,007 secs (0,039 CPU) processing `output color
> > > profile' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,003 secs (0,024 CPU) processing `velvia' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,008 secs (0,057 CPU) processing `vignetting'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,004 secs (0,004 CPU) processing `overexposed'
> > > [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,002 secs (0,015 CPU) processing `gamma' [full]
> > > [dev_process_image] pixel pipeline processing took 1,194 secs (8,025
> CPU)
> > > [dev] took 0,000 secs (0,000 CPU) to load the image.
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,000 secs (0,000 CPU) initing base buffer [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,014 secs (0,052 CPU) processing `white balance'
> > > [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,019 secs (0,083 CPU) processing `highlight
> > > reconstruction' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,016 secs (0,077 CPU) processing `demosaic'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,133 secs (0,760 CPU) processing `denoise
> > > (profiled)' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,175 secs (1,150 CPU) processing `denoise
> > > (profiled)' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,003 secs (0,017 CPU) processing `base curve'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,004 secs (0,019 CPU) processing `input color
> > > profile' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,004 secs (0,017 CPU) processing `vibrance'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,026 secs (0,104 CPU) processing `shadows and
> > > highlights' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,026 secs (0,134 CPU) processing `color zones'
> > > [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,003 secs (0,017 CPU) processing `tone curve'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,033 secs (0,109 CPU) processing `sharpen' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,009 secs (0,048 CPU) processing `output color
> > > profile' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,003 secs (0,013 CPU) processing `velvia' [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,021 secs (0,090 CPU) processing `vignetting'
> [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,003 secs (0,003 CPU) processing `overexposed'
> > > [full]
> > > [dev_pixelpipe] took 0,002 secs (0,010 CPU) processing `gamma' [full]
> > > [dev_process_image] pixel pipeline processing took 0,495 secs (2,703
> CPU)
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance.
> > >
> > > Best regards
> > >
> > > Gonçalo Marrafa
> > >
> > >
> > >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> > > Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> > > unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
> available.
> > > Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Darktable-users mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
> >
> > Hello Gonçalo,
> >
> > while I understand your quest here, maybe you are looking too much at
> > the numbers.
> > Just work with dt with and without opencl (with "--disable-opencl"). If
> > you think that the speed is still "good" without opencl then use the
> > better oss drivers. But if you feel that the gui is slower and you
> > don't enjoy working this way, reenable opencl and don't use the oss
> > drivers.
> >
> > In my opinion the question is more severe with a big screen and if you
> > cannot wait for the final export. Because as long as you are working
> > with the gui, a downscaled version of your image is presented. But this
> > also depends on the source images.
> >
> > tl;dr: Just try dt without opencl for some time and don't trust the
> > numbers....
> >
> > hal
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
_______________________________________________
Darktable-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
