Hi,
On 05/05/2015 18:12, martin brinkmann wrote:
does something like this exist?
afaik not, but i think it would be useful to have some more
or less objective and comparable method to measure how well a
system is suited for running pd.
there was a test patch for rjdj on the ipod/phone which
On 05/11/2015 10:48 AM, Lorenzo Sutton wrote:
One problem with (totally un-scientific) benchmarking I've seen on Linux
(on laptops and with Jack Audio) is that there are a few factors sucha
as cpu scaling, wifi on/off, swappiness.. and
i'm wondering about swapiness...if your system does
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:03 AM, martin brinkmann
m...@martin-brinkmann.de wrote:
but i think it lacks some message-processing, and maybe
memory-access.
Actually chaosmonster1 is heavy on memory access because of the
feedback delay lines. But I just noticed [block~ 1] in the delay line
On 06/05/15 11:37, katja wrote:
Actually chaosmonster1 is heavy on memory access because of the
feedback delay lines.
yes, but maybe the delays are small enough to fit in the cache (if the
cache is big enough), and defeating the cpu cache would make
systems with small or big cache more
On 05/05/15 20:48, katja wrote:
- it runs with pd vanilla or extended
- it has a realistic mixture of dsp objects
but i think it lacks some message-processing, and maybe
memory-access.
http://www.katjaas.nl/doubleprecision/doubleprecision.html
i have just tested 10 instances of chaosmonster
does something like this exist?
afaik not, but i think it would be useful to have some more
or less objective and comparable method to measure how well a
system is suited for running pd.
there was a test patch for rjdj on the ipod/phone which consisted
of simply as much osc~-objects as the device
Hi Martin,
As it happens, I often use your patch chaosmonster1 as pure data
benchmark. Here's why:
- it runs with pd vanilla or extended
- it has a realistic mixture of dsp objects
- it sounds cool
Amongst others I used chaosmonster1 to benchmark pd in double
precision, as shown in the table
