comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Messages from Usenet group comp.lang.idl-pvwave, compiled by Paulo Penteado

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: 2D FFT Slow. Any ideas?
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Return to the default flat view Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: 2D FFT Slow. Any ideas? [message #37250 is a reply to message #37249] Fri, 05 December 2003 10:04 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
R.G. Stockwell is currently offline  R.G. Stockwell
Messages: 363
Registered: July 1999
Senior Member
"Brian" <brian.huether@NOdlrSPAM.de> wrote in message
news:a298a85e9af4e70d51199dcae50c4c81@news.teranews.com...
> I did a little benchmark between IDL and MATLAB. In each case I created a
> random double precision complex array of size 2048 by 2048 and timed how
> long the 2D FFT took. In MATLAB 6.5 it took about 3.5 sec, and in IDL, it
> took about 10 sec. Is there a way to have IDL use MATLAB for the FFT,
> perhaps using activex? Or would the overhead in using activex defeat the
> purpose?
>
> thanks,
>
> brian
>
>

You could try calling an external routine, some of the best being available
at (fastest ft in the west)

http://fftw.org/

Cheers,
bob

PS I can't believe active x calls would improve speed, but hey, you never
know.
And, I'm surprised that the canned IDL is not very fast. Any chance you
don't really
have a 2048^2 array in idl (did you make a 2049^2 array for instance?)

If you post a blip of example code, I can run them here (matlab and idl) and
verify the time difference,
which would be very interesting.
[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: DXF / 3DS data conversion general access
Next Topic: how to pass a complex variable to fortran subroutine

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Wed Oct 08 20:14:11 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01487 seconds