tived wrote:Great work guys!
Well, i rest my case regarding system building and will just refer to the PTGui benchmark test http://hdview.at/speedtest/results.html4. :-) <evil grin> (now I just need to get better at using the software! :-) <not so evil grin>
Sure we can calculate how much scratch disk, ram, etc... but you are unlikely to add and remove hardware everytime you need to build a pano. at the end of the day you are going to need to build a system you can afford and that will fullfill your needs, at for that point the above formula is very handy, and then again next time you need to upgrade.
I think in my own case the ideal system is 3-4 arrays with 8 disks in each, not that I am likely to get a system like that due to $$$ constrains but I think that is what is required to make Giga-pano's or high detailed pano's in a reasonable quick time. Given the latest SSD disks available this would give me a transfer speed in excess of 2+ Gb/sec.
I wasn't going to comment on this but i can't resist - Ronald, your 6 disk raid is very fast there is no doubt it. But a multiple raid setup will be faster IMHO because the computer does not have to wait for it to read and write back to the same disk. Where as a multi disk set up where you move the data through the system will separate the tasks and is able to execute these simultanously AFAIK. We are probably splitting hairs here, but as a general throught the idea of multi-RAID setup should be faster.
Its really hard to compare these things but how about you run the test from the above benchmark, if you haven't done so already and let us know the result. thanks
When we later are able to use the GPU's for more then just previewing that will be greatly beneficial, however, the storage will always be the bottleneck.
Henrik
tived wrote:Great work guys!
Well, i rest my case regarding system building and will just refer to the PTGui benchmark test http://hdview.at/speedtest/results.html4. :-) <evil grin> (now I just need to get better at using the software! :-) <not so evil grin>
Sure we can calculate how much scratch disk, ram, etc... but you are unlikely to add and remove hardware everytime you need to build a pano. at the end of the day you are going to need to build a system you can afford and that will fullfill your needs, at for that point the above formula is very handy, and then again next time you need to upgrade.
I think in my own case the ideal system is 3-4 arrays with 8 disks in each, not that I am likely to get a system like that due to $$$ constrains but I think that is what is required to make Giga-pano's or high detailed pano's in a reasonable quick time. Given the latest SSD disks available this would give me a transfer speed in excess of 2+ Gb/sec.
I wasn't going to comment on this but i can't resist - Ronald, your 6 disk raid is very fast there is no doubt it. But a multiple raid setup will be faster IMHO because the computer does not have to wait for it to read and write back to the same disk. Where as a multi disk set up where you move the data through the system will separate the tasks and is able to execute these simultanously AFAIK. We are probably splitting hairs here, but as a general throught the idea of multi-RAID setup should be faster.
Its really hard to compare these things but how about you run the test from the above benchmark, if you haven't done so already and let us know the result. thanks
When we later are able to use the GPU's for more then just previewing that will be greatly beneficial, however, the storage will always be the bottleneck.
Henrik
Ronald wrote:............
I also noticed that many people is referring to the CPU's performance, and even when I never mentioned before, the CPU performance using the 6 HDD configuration is very good (pretty much between 92 and 100%) see the image.
I think that I cannot do too much to improve the performance in this computer, a mean, I should start thinking in something new with SSD or SAS/SATA 6G, 64GB RAM and dual XEON E7 Processor.... but, it would be just a dream... ;-)
BTW: The PTGui benchmark link doesn't work, could you check it?
KreAture wrote:Btw Hans... I just realized your tag... You'd have charged me €1098 for my large pano haha. (Edit it was 1098 images, not 2214)
http://kreature.org/oslo/oslo_from_ekeberg_2011-07-28_420mm_dehazed.htm
Edit:
My new i7 comp did it in about 2 hours.
Ronald wrote:Hans/Henrik,
...........
Honestly, I never thought about a possible bottleneck due the CPU limitations; and, during the review of the results and CPU configurations in the Gigapixel Panorama Speedtest, I noticed that my CPU "issue", I just have two E5405 processors (2Ghz).
..........
Yes, I did have a CPU bottleneck (and I will solve that situation in some point); however, I don't think that my HDD/RAID configuration is having any problem! :-)
Thanks,
Ron
HansKeesom wrote:Ronald wrote:Hans/Henrik,
...........
Honestly, I never thought about a possible bottleneck due the CPU limitations; and, during the review of the results and CPU configurations in the Gigapixel Panorama Speedtest, I noticed that my CPU "issue", I just have two E5405 processors (2Ghz).
..........
Yes, I did have a CPU bottleneck (and I will solve that situation in some point); however, I don't think that my HDD/RAID configuration is having any problem! :-)
Thanks,
Ron
Hi Ron,
I have to correct myself regarding the CPU-bottleneck thing. I thought I had a CPU-bottleneck, judging from wat I saw from the taskmanager and sourcecontrol. Oke, the pagefile was doing a decent amount of work, but nothing really troublesome. The test mentioned took me 5.5 hours but I hardly do panoramas that size.
So although it seemed useless to increase my memory, the low cost of an upgrade from 6 to 16 GB made me do it anyhow. Result : the test took only 24 minutes instead of 5.5 hours. 9 times as fast!!!!!! Not bad for a 145 euro investment........
Conclusion : even if CPU is very busy, going from few GB's to a decent number of GB s could bring you a lot for little money.
Note, of course, the panoramas I normally do are not done any faster.
regards,
Hans Keesom
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests