Sign up now! · Forgot password?
RSS/Atom feed identi.ca Twitter

Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL

This discussion is connected to the gimp-user-list.gnome.org mailing list which is provided by the GIMP developers and not related to gimpusers.com.

9 of 9 messages available
Toggle history

Please log in to manage your subscriptions.

Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL Jernej Simončič 29 Apr 08:44
  Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL Øyvind Kolås 29 Apr 10:54
   Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL Partha Bagchi 29 Apr 11:16
    Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL Daniel Smith 29 Apr 12:52
   Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL Partha Bagchi 12 May 17:25
    Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL Patrick Horgan 14 May 13:41
     Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL Partha Bagchi 14 May 22:14
Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL Jernej Simončič 29 Apr 13:20
  Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL Partha Bagchi 29 Apr 13:36
Jernej Simončič
2012-04-29 08:44:20 UTC (about 2 years ago)

Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 03:31:26 +0200, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

It also turns out that babl and GEGL on win32 seem to be compiled practically without optimization and without taking modern instruction sets into account, making any testing of them on windows unrepresentative of their actual performance.

What are the recommended optimization flags?

Øyvind Kolås
2012-04-29 10:54:37 UTC (about 2 years ago)

Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Jernej Simončič wrote:

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 03:31:26 +0200, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

It also turns out that babl and GEGL on win32 seem to be compiled practically without optimization and without taking modern instruction sets into account, making any testing of them on windows unrepresentative of their actual performance.

What are the recommended optimization flags?

On win32, no idea, perhaps look at what compiler flags are being used on linux? This is signal processing code and everything from -ffast-math to -ftree-vectorize and probably more are important.

Partha Bagchi
2012-04-29 11:16:13 UTC (about 2 years ago)

Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 6:54 AM, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Jernej Simončič wrote:

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 03:31:26 +0200, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

It also turns out that babl and GEGL on win32 seem to be compiled practically without optimization and without taking modern instruction sets into account, making any testing of them on windows unrepresentative of their actual performance.

What are the recommended optimization flags?

On win32, no idea, perhaps look at what compiler flags are being used on linux? This is signal processing code and everything from -ffast-math to -ftree-vectorize and probably more are important.

/Ø --
«The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed»                                                  -- William Gibson http://pippin.gimp.org/                            http://ffii.org/ _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

I am using -Ofast for my builds. I will add the flags you mention when I build RC1. Right now, I have other headaches with RC1. :(

One thing I can report is that with RC1 on a Mac, Snow Leopard (64-bit build only), I get a timing of 5 minutes with the same scenario as indicated at the top of the thread, far faster than the timing on Windows (64-bit as mentioned before).

Daniel Smith
2012-04-29 12:52:30 UTC (about 2 years ago)

Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL

What model of Mac is it?
And what is the model number exactly of the HP laptop?

I don't suppose anyone has ever built a rendering farm or cluster for Gimp, have they? Could such a thing be done?

Just wondering. Dan

On 4/29/12, Partha Bagchi wrote:

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 6:54 AM, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Jernej Simončič wrote:

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 03:31:26 +0200, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

It also turns out that babl and GEGL on win32 seem to be compiled practically without optimization and without taking modern instruction sets into account, making any testing of them on windows unrepresentative of their actual performance.

What are the recommended optimization flags?

On win32, no idea, perhaps look at what compiler flags are being used on linux? This is signal processing code and everything from -ffast-math to -ftree-vectorize and probably more are important.

/Ø --
«The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed»                                                  -- William Gibson http://pippin.gimp.org/                            http://ffii.org/ _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

I am using -Ofast for my builds. I will add the flags you mention when I build RC1. Right now, I have other headaches with RC1. :(

One thing I can report is that with RC1 on a Mac, Snow Leopard (64-bit build only), I get a timing of 5 minutes with the same scenario as indicated at the top of the thread, far faster than the timing on Windows (64-bit as mentioned before). _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

Jernej Simončič
2012-04-29 13:20:59 UTC (about 2 years ago)

Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:54:37 +0200, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

On win32, no idea, perhaps look at what compiler flags are being used on linux? This is signal processing code and everything from -ffast-math to -ftree-vectorize and probably more are important.

The compiler is still gcc, so the same optimization flags that apply to Linux apply to Windows, too. Right now I'm using "-O2 -mtune=barcelona -mtune=core2 -mfpmath=sse -msse2" for 32-bit build and "-O2 -mtune=barcelona -mtune=core2" for 64-bit build.

Partha Bagchi
2012-04-29 13:36:34 UTC (about 2 years ago)

Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Jernej Simončič wrote:

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:54:37 +0200, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

On win32, no idea, perhaps look at what compiler flags are being used on linux? This is signal processing code and everything from -ffast-math to -ftree-vectorize and probably more are important.

The compiler is still gcc, so the same optimization flags that apply to Linux apply to Windows, too. Right now I'm using "-O2 -mtune=barcelona -mtune=core2 -mfpmath=sse -msse2" for 32-bit build and "-O2 -mtune=barcelona -mtune=core2" for 64-bit build.

-- < Jernej Simončič ><><><><>< http://eternallybored.org/ >

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

I agree.

I just read here (http://pointclouds.org/news/ffast-math.html), it might not be safe to use -ffast-math. I might be worthwhile to turn on -ftree-vectorize for Windows.

Thanks, Partha

Partha Bagchi
2012-05-12 17:25:38 UTC (about 2 years ago)

Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL

I followed your suggestions and built babl-0.1.11/gegl-0.2.1/Gimp-2.8.0 using -Ofast -ffast-math -ftree-vectorize. Using these flags, I reran the test at the top of the thread. The c2g rendering on my machine is now 36 seconds as compared to 6 minutes. I am impressed. :)

Now to test out gimp 2.9.1. That should be fun.

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 6:54 AM, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Jernej Simončič wrote:

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 03:31:26 +0200, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

It also turns out that babl and GEGL on win32 seem to be compiled practically without optimization and without taking modern instruction sets into account, making any testing of them on windows unrepresentative of their actual performance.

What are the recommended optimization flags?

On win32, no idea, perhaps look at what compiler flags are being used on linux? This is signal processing code and everything from -ffast-math to -ftree-vectorize and probably more are important.

/Ø --
«The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed»                                                  -- William Gibson http://pippin.gimp.org/                            http://ffii.org/ _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

Patrick Horgan
2012-05-14 13:41:12 UTC (about 2 years ago)

Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL

On 05/12/2012 10:25 AM, Partha Bagchi wrote:

I followed your suggestions and built babl-0.1.11/gegl-0.2.1/Gimp-2.8.0 using -Ofast -ffast-math -ftree-vectorize. Using these flags, I reran the test at the top of the thread. The c2g rendering on my machine is now 36 seconds as compared to 6 minutes. I am impressed. :)

If it makes such a difference, shouldn't they be defaults?

Patrick

Now to test out gimp 2.9.1. That should be fun.

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 6:54 AM, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Jernej Simončič wrote:

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 03:31:26 +0200, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

It also turns out that babl and GEGL on win32 seem to be compiled practically without optimization and without taking modern instruction sets into account, making any testing of them on windows unrepresentative of their actual performance.

What are the recommended optimization flags?

On win32, no idea, perhaps look at what compiler flags are being used on linux? This is signal processing code and everything from -ffast-math to -ftree-vectorize and probably more are important.

/Ø --
«The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed» -- William Gibson http://pippin.gimp.org/ http://ffii.org/ _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

Partha Bagchi
2012-05-14 22:14:40 UTC (about 2 years ago)

Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL

I am using them as default. Now the only issue with the test above is that the original gaussian filter is still very slooooow. I have to figure out the correspondence between gegl-gaussian-blur and the gaussian blur filter.

On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Patrick Horgan wrote:

On 05/12/2012 10:25 AM, Partha Bagchi wrote:

I followed your suggestions and built babl-0.1.11/gegl-0.2.1/Gimp-2.8.0 using -Ofast -ffast-math -ftree-vectorize. Using these flags, I reran the test at the top of the thread. The c2g rendering on my machine is now 36 seconds as compared to 6 minutes. I am impressed. :)

If it makes such a difference, shouldn't they be defaults?

Patrick

Now to test out gimp 2.9.1. That should be fun.

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 6:54 AM, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Jernej Simončič wrote:

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 03:31:26 +0200, Øyvind Kolås wrote:

It also turns out that babl and GEGL on win32 seem to be compiled practically without optimization and without taking modern instruction sets into account, making any testing of them on windows unrepresentative of their actual performance.

What are the recommended optimization flags?

On win32, no idea, perhaps look at what compiler flags are being used on linux? This is signal processing code and everything from -ffast-math to -ftree-vectorize and probably more are important.

/Ø --
«The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed»                                                  -- William Gibson http://pippin.gimp.org/                            http://ffii.org/ _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list