Re: [ARMini-support] ARMini vs Iyonix
- From: Chris Hall <chris@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: armini-support@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 15:59:58 GMT
In message <cd4ece9e52.martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Martin Wuerthner <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In message <9c7cc09e52.chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Chris Hall <chris@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> In message <9ca6a39e52.martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Martin Wuerthner <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> This is an intriguing puzzle. This particular ArtWorks file is not
>>> even unusually complex. The only obvious performance weakness of the
>>> ARMini compared to an Iyonix is disc access speed, and that is
>>> irrelevant here. For all I have been told, the ARMini should
>>> outperform the Iyonix in any area relevant to this task, in some even
>>> by a large margin, so there should be a considerable speed-up. Even
>>> not having a speed-up would have been surprising, but a dramatic
>>> slowdown is absolutely unexpected. I have a suspicion what could cause
>>> this slowdown. I will run some tests and report back.
>> The actual file (WorldMap_500BC) loads in seven seconds from RAMFS on
>> the Iyonix (Artworks 2.X.00) and in six seconds from the RAMFS on the
>> Raspberry Pi and ARMimi 1000MHz (Artworks 2.XI.01). Not sure what is
>> intriguing.
> We were not discussing loading speed. We were discussing rendering
> speed. It is intriguing that - assuming Nick's measurements are
> correct and can be reproduced - the ARMini is three times slower to
> render this ArtWorks file than the Iyonix, even though it ought to be
> much faster than the Iyonix according to its specifications.
> Martin
I am getting consistent results for rendering (press f12 then return
and time it) as follows:
Pandaboard 1500 MHz 3.5s
Rapsberry Pi 700MHz 4.0s
ARMini 1000MHz 5.5s
Iyonix 600MHz 13.0s
Seeing as the Pi has a video processor these look consistent.
--
Chris Hall <chris@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
To alter your preferences or leave the group,
visit //www.freelists.org/list/armini-support
List-related queries to info@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Other related posts:
