I've already settled on that - Ryzen 7950X. Enblend and other graphics
applications I use really benefit from multiple cores and threads, so
the more cores, the better.
i'm still dreaming of replacing my 3600 with a 5900 or 5950...but alas i
do not have the resources, let alone to go to a new platform. a 7950
would probably outpace the 3600 by a factor 2 or more.
Since I want performance, Intel's continued love affair with efficiency
cores doesn't appeal to me. My experience with Intel performance
processors has been that while Intel loves to chant their peak clock
speeds, their processors can only hit that speed with a single core is
enabled. What's the point of that when the software happily and rapidly
uses multiple cores?
since the whole process of stitching is more a linear process, it is
mostly a single thread process. that does not mean it won't run on
multiple cores, they just wait on each other.
so in my experience with hugin, the best single thread machine is the
quickest.
My working method is interactive. I don't do nearly as many images as
you do!
it was an experiment for me, but i'm not sure i will continue this, the
fact that, by now, i have a dedicated pc running for some 3 month a year
just to stitch the images is a bit much.
I think nona uses OpenGL, which NVidia doesn't really support. NVidia
wants to lock customers into their platform; the antithesis of OpenGL.
Nona plus the on-board Intel UHD-630 works fine.
True, however nvidea does state their rtx30xx series does support
openGL, but not without a heavy penalty. when i saw my uhd630 run
circles around the dedicated rtx while the rtx was running at some 100
watt i knew all i needed to know.
Another question to think about.
Multicore CPU: yes, many cores/threads. Start three processes, each gets
a core/thread.
Is the same true about GPUs? Or does a GPU handle input from only one
source at a time? So if script 1 fires off Nona on the GPU, what happens
when script 2 and script 3 try to run nona on the GPU at the same time?
It stays linear, so they will wait for each other to finish and
sometimes one of the script gets ahead. the same is true for the gpu.
but with only one cmd script my cpu will only run at some 20-30% (all
cores) so that is where multiple scrips come in handy.
Maarten, in my experience, replacing your HDD drives with SSDs would
make a big difference. Even connected via SATA cables, SSD is faster.
NVME drives (if your motherboard supports them) would be even faster.
If your motherboard doesn't support NVME, you might invest in a 4-port
PCIe expansion card that adds NVME connections, and replace your HDDs
with NVME SSDs on the card. I think it would massively increase read and
write speeds.
I do have place for one extra m.2 and have enough sata ports left and am
aware of the advantage of ssd, but i just can't afford that..at least
not this year.
my solution to use one hdd per running script and one 'master' for the
originals is the best i can currently do with the means i have.
if i had a method to seperate the nona tiff and the location where
enblend writes the final image, i might be able to gain a bit...but
wouldn't know how or if that can be done.
but if i decide to continue this year, there will come a time that i get
one or more ssd drives for this. (i would need something like 4TB just
to get started)
Go for as much processor performance and memory you can. Hugin spends
nearly all of its processing time running on the CPU and using memory.
CPU and GPU are more important, in my experience Hugin isn't that memory
intensive
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/b5bdfe31-72cc-4fb7-b0f7-640bd6a874fb%40gmail.com.
