comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » Platform recommendation/tradeoffs?

Home » Public Forums » archive » Platform recommendation/tradeoffs?

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Platform recommendation/tradeoffs? [message #3970]

Wed, 12 April 1995 00:00

smithjp
Messages: 1
Registered: April 1995

Junior Member

I am about to order some flavor of IDL (Mac or Unix) and
I'm wondering if anyone can help me gauge just how much performance
I loose by getting the Mac product. (This saves me enough money
to buy a Q630 cpu)

I have a SG Iris Indigo with lots of memory and some disk space
that I could be using for IDL, or I could put it on the aforementioned
Q630. If intense image processing were among my requirements it would
be a pretty easy decision, but the data that I'll be working on is
basically about 16 or 32 128x128 matrices - not too big of a problem
from a graphic standpoint (I suppose I would rarely need to look at
more than 1 128x128 image at a time, for instance)

This problem has a lot of number crunching - 128x128 non linear
least squares fits of at least 4 parameters per fit.

Any comments? Any experience using IDL on a 68040?

TIA, Joe Smith

Report message to a moderator

Re: Platform recommendation/tradeoffs? [message #4013 is a reply to message #3970]

Thu, 20 April 1995 00:00

sterner
Messages: 106
Registered: February 1991

Senior Member

velt@rad.usf.edu (Robert Velthuizen (DMIP)) writes:

> Our test results:

> ========================== IDL ==============================

> IDL performance test (TIME_TEST and GRAPHICS_TIMES)
> Notes:
> (1) cd to a local disk before running the test, e.g. /tmp
> (2) use the second run (swap already allocated)
> (3) maybe do a .run time_test before running.

> computations graphics
> SS20/61/SX, 96MB, Solaris 2.3 14.2s 3.4s
> Solaris 2.4 13.2s
> SS10/51/SX, 96MB, Solaris 2.4 16.7s 4.9s
> SS10/dual 90MHz Hypersparc,
> 96MB, Solaris 2.3 13.8s 2.7s
> 160MB, Solaris 2.4 13.7s 2.9s
> SS10/51/GX, 96MB, SunOS 4.1.3 14.8s 4.0s
> 690MP/4proc/TGX,
> 128MB, SunOs 4.1.3 44.6s 7.7s
> SS2/1proc/GS 64MB SunOs 4.1.3 48.2s 15.2s
> Sun IPC/CG3 32MB SunOs 4.1.3 72.5s

Let me add one more machine:

HP 9000/735 140Mb HP-UX A.09.05 10.1s 2.3s

Ray Sterner sterner@tesla.jhuapl.edu
The Johns Hopkins University North latitude 39.16 degrees.
Applied Physics Laboratory West longitude 76.90 degrees.
Laurel, MD 20723-6099
WWW Home page: ftp://fermi.jhuapl.edu/www/s1r/people/res/res.html

Report message to a moderator

Re: Platform recommendation/tradeoffs? [message #4025 is a reply to message #3970]

Wed, 19 April 1995 00:00

velt
Messages: 19
Registered: June 1994

Junior Member

In article <D70BB9.6u1@mv.mv.com>, kennealy@mv.mv.com (Jack Kennealy) writes:
> daft@debussy.crd.ge.com (Chris Daft) writes:
>
>> I second the request for some comparison of IDL's performance on
>> various CPUs.

Our test results:

========================== IDL ==============================

IDL performance test (TIME_TEST and GRAPHICS_TIMES)
Notes:
(1) cd to a local disk before running the test, e.g. /tmp
(2) use the second run (swap already allocated)
(3) maybe do a .run time_test before running.

computations graphics
SS20/61/SX, 96MB, Solaris 2.3 14.2s 3.4s
Solaris 2.4 13.2s
SS10/51/SX, 96MB, Solaris 2.4 16.7s 4.9s
SS10/dual 90MHz Hypersparc,
96MB, Solaris 2.3 13.8s 2.7s
160MB, Solaris 2.4 13.7s 2.9s
SS10/51/GX, 96MB, SunOS 4.1.3 14.8s 4.0s
690MP/4proc/TGX,
128MB, SunOs 4.1.3 44.6s 7.7s
SS2/1proc/GS 64MB SunOs 4.1.3 48.2s 15.2s
Sun IPC/CG3 32MB SunOs 4.1.3 72.5s

Robert Velthuizen (velt@rad.usf.edu),
Digital Medical Imaging Program of the
H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute at the
University of South Florida, Tampa FL 33612.

Report message to a moderator

RE: Platform recommendation/tradeoffs? [message #4035 is a reply to message #3970]

Tue, 18 April 1995 00:00

mallozzi
Messages: 60
Registered: August 1994

Member

>> I know this isn't alt.intel.vs.the.world, but which CPU of which new
>> workstation is which P5 within hailing distance of? A low-end
>> SPARCstation? An AlphaStation 250 4/266? A 60 MHz P5? 100 MHz?

I ran IDL's time_test on a Pentium 90, and it took ~17 seconds. I then
ran it on a DEC Alpha, and it took ~35 seconds. Grant it, the Alpha had
about 40 processes going at the time, but the point is, the Pentium 90
is mighty quick.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Platform recommendation/tradeoffs? [message #4036 is a reply to message #3970]

Tue, 18 April 1995 00:00

Fergus Gallagher
Messages: 41
Registered: January 1995

Member

I have recently taken delivery of a new SPARCstation 20, primarily for
running IDL applications. I was a bit dismayed to see that my TIME_TEST
benchmark was about 17.5 secs.

Earlier entries in this thread have shown pentiums running better than
this (15 secs, if I recall)

Have I wasted my money? Or is TIME_TEST not a good measure. Obviously,
my SPARCstation has more memory (64Mb + 64Mb virtual) but I could have
bought this amount on memory for a pentium and still saved enough for a
jolly to Bali.....in fact, I need a PC too, for running WP apps amd the
like (no WABI comments, please), so I estimate I could have saved about
=A38k ($12k)

As I am "sole user" on my system, configuration issues aren't really a
problem.

Comments, anyone?

Fergus

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
| Fergus Gallagher |
| Remote Sensing Applications Development Unit |
| British National Space Centre |
| Monks Wood |
| Huntingdon PE17 2LS / UK |
| |
| F.Gallagher@nerc.ac.uk |
| http://uh.nmt.ac.uk/bnsc/fgg.html |
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

Report message to a moderator

Re: Platform recommendation/tradeoffs? [message #4039 is a reply to message #3970]

Mon, 17 April 1995 00:00

gurman
Messages: 82
Registered: August 1992

Member

In article <3mllmh$97r@adam.cc.sunysb.edu>, Chris Jacobsen
<jacobsen@xray1.physics.sunysb.edu> wrote:

> The CPU in a pentium is within hailing distance of the CPU of new
> unix workstations. If that's the only issue, a PC is a good platform
> for IDL in terms of bang for the buck.

I know this isn't alt.intel.vs.the.world, but which CPU of which new
workstation is which P5 within hailing distance of? A low-end
SPARCstation? An AlphaStation 250 4/266? A 60 MHz P5? 100 MHz?

> For me, a big issue is memory. For image processing,
> we will frequently end up with several 1024x1024 complex floating
> point arrays at 8 MB memory each. We can afford to have one $10,000
> unix workstation with 128 or even 256 MB of memory and a half-dozen
> X terminals so that one or two people can do image processing at any
> moment. We cannot afford to put 128 MB of memory in each of half a
> dozen PCs. Also, nobody ever screws up AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS
> on the unix workstation...

Actually, for a single user, the PC or Mac platform often makes more
sense, simply because the memory is cheaper and the single user can do the
image processing whenever he/she wants to.

It's really a question of what octane, memory, and display options
your application(s) require)s(.

Joe Gurman

--
J.B. Gurman / Solar Physics Branch/ NASA Goddard Space Flight Center/
Greenbelt MD 20771 USA / gurman@uvsp.gsfc.nasa.gov
| Federal employees are still prohibited from holding opinions while|
| at work. Therefore, any opinions expressed herein are somebody |
| else's. |

Report message to a moderator

Re: Platform recommendation/tradeoffs? [message #4046 is a reply to message #3970]

Sat, 15 April 1995 00:00

ps
Messages: 14
Registered: September 1994

Junior Member

Chris Jacobsen (jacobsen@xray1.physics.sunysb.edu) wrote:
: The CPU in a pentium is within hailing distance of the CPU of new
: unix workstations. If that's the only issue, a PC is a good platform
: for IDL in terms of bang for the buck.

: For me, a big issue is memory. For image processing,
: we will frequently end up with several 1024x1024 complex floating
: point arrays at 8 MB memory each. We can afford to have one $10,000
: unix workstation with 128 or even 256 MB of memory and a half-dozen
: X terminals so that one or two people can do image processing at any
: moment. We cannot afford to put 128 MB of memory in each of half a
: dozen PCs. Also, nobody ever screws up AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS
: on the unix workstation...

So get the PC, put 128MB and Linux to it. IDL 4.0 is announced for Linux
Then connect your XTerms to it and enjoy.

Peter

------------------ Peter 'PIT' Suetterlin -----------------
| Kiepenheuer Institut | Sternfreunde Breisgau e.V |
| fuer Sonnenphysik | |
| 0761/3198-210 | 0761/71571 |
-<ps@kis.uni-freiburg.de>-<suettpet@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>--

Report message to a moderator

Re: Platform recommendation/tradeoffs? [message #4049 is a reply to message #3970]

Fri, 14 April 1995 00:00

kid
Messages: 1
Registered: April 1995

Junior Member

In article <3mhc42$6lt@mozo.cc.purdue.edu>, smithjp@sage.cc.purdue.edu
(Joseph Smith) wrote:

> I am about to order some flavor of IDL (Mac or Unix) and
> I'm wondering if anyone can help me gauge just how much performance
> I loose by getting the Mac product. (This saves me enough money
> to buy a Q630 cpu)

Hi Joe -

I've been using IDL on a Mac IIfx for the last month or so and on a Sun
SPARCstation 10 for the last couple years. I also had a chance to run the
native demo version of IDL on a PowerMac 7100/66 (my quick and informal
testing put the PowerMac at about 75% the speed of the SS-10). The Mac
IIfx runs IDL pretty well on applications that don't require a lot of
memory or disk access. I have one (lots of 16-bit graphics and array
manipualtions) that I was playing with today that requires about 60 MB of
RAM (the IIfx only has 20 MB, so the rest was VM). As I expected,
performance was pretty poor, but it ran correctly.

If you already have the Q630, I think it would be adequate for what you
are intending to run on it. If not, I'd get a PowerMac instead. You can
download a Mac demo version (10 minute not 30 day due to Mac license
managers) from gateway.rsinc.com to try out on your Q630 to get a decent
idea.

--
Rhonda Schienle
Email: kid@visdata.com
Licensed Massage Therapist on California's Central Coast

Report message to a moderator

Re: Platform recommendation/tradeoffs? [message #4085 is a reply to message #3970]

Mon, 24 April 1995 00:00

ps
Messages: 14
Registered: September 1994

Junior Member

Ray Sterner (sterner@strdev.jhuapl.edu) wrote:
: velt@rad.usf.edu (Robert Velthuizen (DMIP)) writes:
: >Our test results:
: >========================== IDL ==============================
: >IDL performance test (TIME_TEST and GRAPHICS_TIMES)
: >Notes:
: > (1) cd to a local disk before running the test, e.g. /tmp
: > (2) use the second run (swap already allocated)
: > (3) maybe do a .run time_test before running.
: > computations graphics
: >SS20/61/SX, 96MB, Solaris 2.3 14.2s 3.4s
: > Solaris 2.4 13.2s
: >SS10/51/SX, 96MB, Solaris 2.4 16.7s 4.9s
: >SS10/dual 90MHz Hypersparc,
: > 96MB, Solaris 2.3 13.8s 2.7s
: > 160MB, Solaris 2.4 13.7s 2.9s
: >SS10/51/GX, 96MB, SunOS 4.1.3 14.8s 4.0s
: >690MP/4proc/TGX,
: > 128MB, SunOs 4.1.3 44.6s 7.7s
: >SS2/1proc/GS 64MB SunOs 4.1.3 48.2s 15.2s
: >Sun IPC/CG3 32MB SunOs 4.1.3 72.5s
: Let me add one more machine:
: HP 9000/735 140Mb HP-UX A.09.05 10.1s 2.3s

Allthough maybe not completely comparable, as it is PV-WAVE (still
waiting for the IDL-Version) using the time_test of IDL 3.61a:

486DX/2-80 16MB Linux 1.2.5 30.2s 7.8s (1MB S3 card 8bit)

------------------ Peter 'PIT' Suetterlin -----------------
| Kiepenheuer Institut | Sternfreunde Breisgau e.V |
| fuer Sonnenphysik | |
| 0761/3198-210 | 0761/71571 |
-<ps@kis.uni-freiburg.de>-<suettpet@sun1.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>--

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic:	Dragging mouse question
Next Topic:	X device Resolution

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Wed Oct 08 13:52:26 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00754 seconds