HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Announcement of new releases, bugs, support, suggestions

Moderator: Stas Yatsenko

pwnell
Posts: 32
Joined: 16.12.2012 21:40

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Unread post by pwnell » 07.03.2018 00:39

Well that just made me incredibly happy as I was floored when I found out my new iMac Pro was slower with HF than my old Mac Pro 2013. Now the tables have turned. Thanks so much.

User avatar
Stas Yatsenko
Posts: 3534
Joined: 06.05.2009 14:05
Contact:

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Unread post by Stas Yatsenko » 07.03.2018 12:54

So now the new 10-core Mac is faster than the old 6-core one, just as it should be?

pwnell
Posts: 32
Joined: 16.12.2012 21:40

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Unread post by pwnell » 07.03.2018 18:48

That I cannot confirm as I sold it a couple of days after I got my iMac Pro so I cannot do another test.

sbuerger
Posts: 22
Joined: 05.06.2010 15:31

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Unread post by sbuerger » 07.03.2018 20:13

Wow, that speed gain is impressive. I just downloaded the beta as well and did a little testing myself. Though I don't get a speedup as high as pwnell which, as I suppose, depends on some of my personal settings (I mostly use pre-calculated DNG files with method C and Lanczos 3 interpolation), I still experience quite a recognizable speed boost of 200-300% with the 7.0 beta. Congratulations on that, Stas - HF always used to be about 400% faster than Zerene, now it's 1200%. :D
Will my problems from this thread http://www.heliconsoft.com/forum/viewto ... =10&t=9673 already be resolved in the 7.0 final release? I noticed you have already integrated a cache disk quota, but I don't see any changes in the batch processing dialog - plus, the beta completely ignores my setting of ascending/decending order even in the main window now.
BTW, is there a beta testing thread/subforum? I would really like to participate in that.

Kind regards
Stephan

User avatar
Stas Yatsenko
Posts: 3534
Joined: 06.05.2009 14:05
Contact:

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Unread post by Stas Yatsenko » 09.03.2018 17:18

Automatic sorting is always enabled for batch processing. We will probably let you select the order in the future, but it shouldn't be a problem. If your stack can't be rendered properly with auto sorting, there's probably an issue with the stack.

You still can't specify dust map(s) in the batch mode, that will be added later.

Actually, the beta focuses on RAM utilization and management, we did not implement the disk quota yet. But it's a priority for the next update, and the work we have already done allows for implementing proper cache management soon.

There's no special topic or section, feel free to create a topic. Sounds like a good idea.

sbuerger
Posts: 22
Joined: 05.06.2010 15:31

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Unread post by sbuerger » 09.03.2018 20:37

Hi Stas,
unfortunately, automatic sorting is a big problem for me and for everybody who (like me) does
a) micropanoramas like this (mounted from 15 stacks of 150-350 shots each): https://www.stephanbuerger.com/makro/
and/or
b) sequential stacks (VR objects, timelapse etc.) of macro/micro objects like this: https://www.stephanbuerger.com/taraxacum2
and/or
c) substacks ("slabs") to avoid/mask "transparent" elements when using render method C (which affects nearly every microscopic stack using reflected light and about every third of those using transmitted light).

Reason is that in all of these cases you depend on stacking results that all have an identical scale and are stacked starting from the "closest" frame in the stack. To achieve that, it is essential to start every stack photo series from the same object plane which has to be the closest point of the whole object, take as many shots as your current object field requires, and then stack the photos in ascending order. If you would use descending order instead (which is what, in most cases, automatic order will do since it recognizes the image with the farthest focus plane as the largest in scale), you would get an individual scale for each resulting stack, making it impossible to stitch the results to a panorama, combine them in a movie or VR object, or mount substacks to mask out transparencies.
I don't see a need to be able to set the order in the batch dialog individually (would be luxury but not essential), but, as you yourself said in the other thread: It should respect the currently selected (meaning, last used) option, be it ascending, descending, or automatic.
So please, please, please don't "take back the promise"... :(

As for the betatesting thread: Ok, I will be glad to start one - still will have to do some testing before this will make sense, though. So, if anybody would like to pre-empt me in that respect, I would simply participate in that thread.

Kind regards
Stephan


sbuerger
Posts: 22
Joined: 05.06.2010 15:31

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Unread post by sbuerger » 12.03.2018 17:03

Thanks a lot!!

Post Reply