[linux] Which CPU for AfterShot?

[jakkul]

Hi!

I'm currently using X3220 Intel Xeon CPU. 4 cores, 2.4GHz, DDR2 memory, it's the Xeon version of the Q6600. It starts to show its age, especially when working with RAW files from Fuji camera in AfterShot Pro. I'm thinking about upgrading my rig to be able to work on my RAW files more efficiently. AfterShot uses all cores available for processing. I use Fedora 21 64bit, fairly standard with gnome-shell. I can switch to an other Linux distribution if that would be beneficial. I play a bit on steam (civ5 mostly) and wine (lfs mostly). I've got GTX750 1GB that I would like to keep - with nvidia binary drivers. It has more power than I need.

So I've got a question to you all:

Which CPU will give me more processing power for AfterShot? AMD or Intel? My price region is around 800 pln (that is PL currency) for CPU. So I'm between Intel i5-4460 or AMD FX-8370E or AMD APU A10 7850K (this one's cheaper but newer). Selecting a mobo and ram chips will be easier.

So I want to know just one thing - the power per $ for AfterShot. For everything else it will be faster than needed anyway.

---

Testing results:
afx: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2670QM CPU @ 2.20GHz with a slow laptop hard drive. Ubuntu, OpenCL off about 5 secs
afx: i7-5820K. Windows7, OpenCL off about 2,5 secs
jakkul: i5-2520m, ssd, 8GB ram, AS 2.2 64bit, ubuntu 64bit OpenCL Disabled 9 secs
jakkul: x3220, ssd, 4GB ram, AS 2.2 64bit, fedora 64bit OpenCL Disabled: 9 secs
Dutchmm: AMD Quad-Core A10-4655M APU with Radeon HD 7620G Graphics, W8.1 64-bits, 8GB Ram ASP 2.1 (32 bits) OpenCL Disabled: 38 Seconds
Dutchmm: AMD Quad-Core A10-4655M APU with Radeon HD 7620G Graphics, W8.1 64-bits, 8GB Ram ASP 2.2 (64 bits) OpenCL Disabled: 16.8 Seconds
Dutchmm: I7-4875T, Linux Mint 17.1, 16GB Ram AS 2.1 (32 bits) Open CL disabled: 38 seconds
Dutchmm: I7-4875T, Linux Mint 17.1, 16GB Ram AS 2.2 (32 bits) Open CL disabled: 4.04 seconds

Please contact me if you want to provide results of converting a reference file to JPG.

---

[afx]

For an imaging machine I would stay away from an i5 and always try to get an i7. I recently switched from a Quad Phenom which was getting a bit slowish, if not to say unbearable with 24 or 36 MP files. and looking at current AMD CPUs I don't find anything interesting I must admit. I used to be an AMD only guy...

Get a hex i7 if you can. The new generation has gotten quite competitive in price (compared to two years ago when I first looked where it was ridiculus). AS will use all 12 threads on a box like this.

I had delayed my update plans because of the high cost of the hex i7, the i7-5820K was €360 in January when I ordered. Still a lot, but only a third of what it used to be...

cheers
afx

[jakkul]

Dude, i7-5820K is more than two times more expensive than my budget and it requires two times more expensive mobo for LGA2011 and DDR4 chips. In total that is a 35 1.4 lens for my Fuji. Increase in work output quality - 0. Increase in work comfort - probably enormous over my X3220, but will it be big in case of upgrading from i5-4460 ... Photography is my hobby, not a job And I'm not that wealthy anyway

Would it be OK if I sent you one of my RAW files with the transformation file, so you can tell me how fast it gets processed on your rig? In my case I get approx 10-12 seconds.

So the story continues: sub $200 CPU Intel vs AMD. Intel i5-4460 or AMD FX-8370E or AMD APU A10 7850K - which would give most processing power in AfterShot on Linux.

[afx]

Sure, get me a raw file and the XMP with typical adjustments (if you see them adding a significant amount of processing time). On my 12MP D700 file I have subsecond conversion times, don't remember whether the 24MP D750 files are also below a second.

As I wrote above, I've put off the update of my box for quite a while to get something really fast, only spending a bit of money on the way for an SSD drive to hold cache and DB. That already can have a significant impact on performance and in terms of effect per $ usually has a much larger impact than a new CPU.

cheers
afx

[jakkul]

So we did some test with AFX. Results are:

afx: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2670QM CPU @ 2.20GHz with a slow laptop hard drive. OpenCL off about 5 secs
afx: i7-5820K. OpenCL off about 2,5 secs
jakkul: i5-2520m, ssd, ubuntu 64bit: 9 secs
jakkul: x3220, ssd, fedora 64bit: 9 secs

Who wants the testfile to post their results?

[jakkul]

new results from Dutchmm:

Dutchmm: AMD Quad-Core A10-4655M APU with Radeon HD 7620G Graphics, W8.1 64-bits, 8GB Ram ASP 2.1 (32 bits) OpenCL Disabled: 38 Seconds
Dutchmm: AMD Quad-Core A10-4655M APU with Radeon HD 7620G Graphics, W8.1 64-bits, 8GB Ram ASP 2.2 (64 bits) OpenCL Disabled: 16.8 Seconds
Dutchmm: I7-4875T, Linux Mint 17.1, 16GB Ram AS 2.1 (32 bits) Open CL disabled: 38 seconds
Dutchmm: I7-4875T, Linux Mint 17.1, 16GB Ram AS 2.2 (32 bits) Open CL disabled: 4.04 seconds

What we see is how much AS 2.2 is faster than AS 2.1.

Who wants the file?

[garibaldi]

I am also thinking about building a new photo processing system (running ASP on Arch Linux) sometime in 2015. With how good Intel's onboard graphics have gotten, is there a big benefit to purchasing a dedicated graphics card for use with ASP? Based on these benchmarks, I'd prefer to spend more on a better i7 than to split spending between a CPU and dedicated graphics card

[Dutchmm]

My benchmarks were not intended to compare the relative performance of my laptop and desktop processors. They were there to test the difference in speed between versions 2.1 and 2.2 of ASP2, and (to a lesser degree) to see how toggling the OpenGL Acceleration switch would affect the processing times.

There are some significant hardware differences between my off the shelf HP laptop (A10) and the custom-built fanless desktop (i7) with which I took my metrics. The laptop has a traditional HDD that probably rotates at 5400rpm. This being the only storage device on the laptop, it has to carry all the I/O involved in developing the benchmark image. On the desktop, all the output will have gone to SSD, but swapping (if any) will have been to RAM.

Even if one took these stats as showing conclusively that ASP2 is better on an i7 system than on an A10, is ASP2 the only program people are going to run on their shiny new computers? Admittedly, if you run linux you are probably not going to run Call of Duty, but there may be other applications for which AMD's hardware gives you more bang for buck, seeing that the A10-7850K Black Edition - IIRC, Black Editions are unlocked, so you can overclock them to death - goes for €133 ...

[afx]

I'd prefer to spend more on a better i7 than to split spending between a CPU and dedicated graphics card

If the GPU support in AS where not so messed up, then the balancing the GPU with a CPU would the the way to go. But as it stands now, if you want speed, get as many cores as you can get.

cheers
afx

[garibaldi]

I'd prefer to spend more on a better i7 than to split spending between a CPU and dedicated graphics card

If the GPU support in AS where not so messed up, then the balancing the GPU with a CPU would the the way to go. But as it stands now, if you want speed, get as many cores as you can get.

cheers
afx

Thanks for the clarification. Have you found that clock speed is particularly important as well, or moreso the number of cores that matters for performance?

[afx]

Number of cores is more important than clock speed.
This is why picked the slowest Hex i7.

cheers
afx

[SagaciousB]

Curious, why are you running benchmarks with OpenCL disabled?
AMD CPU's feature HSA, which I understand can greatly enhance OpenCL performance because memory doesn't have to be copied from CPU RAM0 to GPGPU RAM and back again in order to do operations. This could give AMD APU's a huge boost over anything Intel, if they're taking advantage of it.

[afx]

Curious, why are you running benchmarks with OpenCL disabled?

Because it is often slower....
The OpenCL support in AS is a game of chance.

cheers
afx

[zephyrprime]

Yeah and here we are in 2017 and the OCL support still sucks. I was using the AMD system monitor to monitor OCL usage. I have a radeon 290x btw. GPU usage is barely anything even at max settings. Also, the gpu is only used when exporting files - it shows 0% usage for anything else.

[BNBPhoto]

Hello,

Just to illustrate what you can do with old tech without breaking the bank.

just for reference. I am running currently on:

- 2x Intel Xeon L5408 Quad-core (Each CPU has 12MB of L2 Cache and consumes 45W) (Currently 6 € a piece on a certain Chinese website)
- 32 GB of DDR2 ECC RAM (66 € on that same Chinese website)
- 128 GB SSD for OS (Mint 18.1 Cinnamon).
- 3x 2TB SAS drives in a RAID 1+0 as my /home folder
- It's all on a DELL PRECISION 690 DUAL XEON LGA771 Mother board (about 60 € on ebay)
- NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700 graphics card

Oh, and also an EIZO S2402w monitor. Everything cost me about 300 € (with the monitor). The SAS drives have been donated to me.

The whole rig is about 8 years old but still flies. I have "upgraded" to it last year and I think I am still good for another 8 years at least.