New PC: biggest bang for the buck?

[bitli]

It would be useful to consider two aspects:

• How fast is a standard process that can run on all reasonable configurations supporting PixInsight
• What is the largest (in some sense to define) process that can be run in a given configuration

I suspect (but benchmarks are there to validate or invalidate assumptions) that an important difference between a powerfull and less powerfull machines is the size of what can be done, more than the time. It is nice to make an operation twice faster. But I have seen that some operations are simply impossible on smaller configurations (like having many large images open). Could we define a process that requires a lot of memory and make a test with bigger and bigger images (or more and more images) to see when it becomes impossible impracticable to run it(for example when there is some thrashing).  This would require some scripting.

-- bitli

[vicent_peris]

I would think a single process icon (distributed as a PSM) would serve as starting point for a benchmark. Why would it need to be scripted? It already shows the time it takes to execute in the process window:

ProcessContainer: Processing view: LDN1622_4
Crop
Crop: -2, -2, -2, -2: 100%
HistogramTransformation
Processing channel #0: Histogram transformation: 100%
Processing channel #1: Histogram transformation: 100%
Processing channel #2: Histogram transformation: 100%
0.373 s

It would be nice if each individual step was timed so you can compare where the time spent but that's not really necessary.

Hi,

The problem is that the processing I designed had background reference previews and mask generation. But just for fun... I have uploaded an image and a PSM file. Apply to the image and see how much time your computer takes. The resulting image is not good, but it's impossible to do a good color calibration without a good background reference.

http://www.astrofoto.es/Benchmark

There is an image and a process icon.

My computer takes 23.39 sec with the console open, and 21.79 sec with the console closed. It's a quad core 2.67Ghz Core 2 Extreme Edition, 4 GB DDR2 800 MHz RAM and SAS HDDs. ADDED: OS IS FEDORA 10 64 BIT.



Regards,
Vicent.

[Yuriy Toropin]

Vicent's set tried.

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 (@3GHz), 8Gb RAM (@1200MHz 1066MHz), 1Tb Samsung HDD,
Win 7 Ultimate (x64 bits),
PI 1.05.09.0561 eng (x86-64)

It takes 13.9sec (console open) to proceed.

Regards,
    Yuriy

RAM Clock Corrected

[Juan Conejero]

Mac Pro (2008 Edition) dual quad-core Intel Xeon @2.8 GHz
RAM 8 GB @800 MHz
Mac OS X 10.6.2
Two 750 GB Western Digital SATA hard disks

16.8 s

Yuriy, your overclocked CPU and memory FSB really make a difference!

(Edited: fixed CPU speed unit: GHz, not MHz )

[sleshin]

HP Pavilion Elite Desktop
Win 7 Ultimate 64 bit
Intel i7 quad core(975) 3.33 GHz
RAM: 12 GB DDR3-1066MHz
HD: 320GB @ 10K rpm

11.5 s

Steve

[Jordi Gallego]

HP EliteBook 8730w
Win 7 64
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9000 2.0 GHz
8 GB  DDR-2 800 MHz
18,2s (console open)

Not very good performance compared with others (but it has DreamColor technology providing 96% representation of Adobe RGB gamut  )

Regards
Jordi

[Silvercup]

Hi:

How I apply psm file? I get an error in the first pixelmath process.

Silvercup.

[vicent_peris]

To me, seems that calculations are actually done way faster under Windows than under Linux or OSX. Can be this possible?


V.

[avastro]

Ok, here are my test result:

Win Vista 32, i7 920 @2.67ghz, 4Go RAM DDR3 1333,500Go SATA2
MSI X58C.

15.985 s console open

Antoine

[bitli]

Hi, I also did not find how to apply the process icon, when I load ne, I get a bunch of process on the workspace. If I load the second one, I get some process renamed. Dragging the psf fiel on top of the image does seem to load them only.  Could somebody clarify the process?
thanks - bitli

[georg.viehoever]

Bitli,

You need to drop the Benchmark Process Icon on the FITS image. At first, I did not see this icon. This was because I was on the second PI desktop when I loaded the PSM file. You have to go to the first desktop. In my case, the icon was on the upper right of the screen.

Hope that helps.
Georg

[vicent_peris]

Hi,

the reason seems to be that, in this process container, almost all the processes don't profit from parallelization.

Please go again to http://www.astrofoto.es/Benchmark and donwload the new process icon. This one uses only highly paralellized processes.

My computer does the job within 12.3 sec.


Regards,
Vicent.

[vicent_peris]

Hi, I also did not find how to apply the process icon, when I load ne, I get a bunch of process on the workspace. If I load the second one, I get some process renamed. Dragging the psf fiel on top of the image does seem to load them only.  Could somebody clarify the process?
thanks - bitli

Sorry! Please, reload the process icon, as there were a lot of icons in the other workspaces!


V.

[Jordi Gallego]

With new set of icon:

HP EliteBook 8730w
Win 7 64 Professional
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9000 2.0 GHz
8 GB  DDR-2 800 MHz
11,3s (console open)

Big improvement!

[Juan Conejero]

New set of icons:

Mac Pro (2008 Edition) dual quad-core Intel Xeon @2.8 GHz
RAM 8 GB @800 MHz
Mac OS X 10.6.2
Two 750 GB Western Digital SATA hard disks

6.9 s