Erik, should be fixed now, can you try again and let me know if the issue is still there? Thanks!
Pierangelo, Thanks, that worked!
1 Like
SanjayaāsĀ Ā Lembongan Project - 865 Seconds
CPU - Dual Intel XeonĀ E5-2630 @2.3GHZ (2 sockets, 12 cores = 24 logical processors)
CPU Cooler - Unknown
GPU - Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070
RAM Amount - 32 GB (16x2gb)Ā
RAM Speed - 1600mhz
SSD - SamsungĀ SSD 850 250GB
Motherboard -Ā not sure
Operating System - Windows 10 Pro 64 bit
Pix4D Mapper Pro 4.1.15; all default processing settings using the 3D Maps template
For the Timber Project, do you load all of the MSP and RGBĀ images, or just one or the other?
Ā
TimberĀ Project - 1680 Seconds
Ā
CPU - Dual Intel XeonĀ E5-2630 @2.3GHZ (2 sockets, 12 cores = 24 logical processors)
CPU Cooler - Unknown
GPU - Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070
RAM Amount - 32 GB (16x2gb)Ā
RAM Speed - 1600mhz
SSD - SamsungĀ SSD 850 250GB
Motherboard -Ā not sure
Operating System - Windows 10 Pro 64 bit
Pix4D Mapper Pro 4.1.15; all default processing settings using theĀ AG Multispectral
Edit: Sorry guys I have had a really busy fall with the harvest and field work here. I am going to sit down and gather all this data together and update the build benchmarks as well as build another consumer pc based on a the new 8700k.Ā
Just picked up the parts yesterday on a trip to micro center. Picked up a couple difference motherboards, the 8700k, two 500 GB 960ās to test some raid configs, and another cooler with different fans to test cooling.
Also going to probably test deliding the 8700k after I get a base benchmark.
Im going to post the prices for all of this too with some pictures for those interested.Ā
Brian
2 Likes
@Brian Young, did you get the chance to throw the 8700k together yet? I am stuck between buying it or a 7900x and wanted to see your performance benchmarks in comparison. Thanks!
Ā
Marcus
Hey Guys,
Ā
I was wondering if you guys could help me understand an issue Iām having with processing speed. I have been seeing very long processing times from my workstations for even small projects. It created a backlog for me so I even went and got some virtual machines online and then still had to use a few standard desktop computers to help catch up. In doing so I noticed my small desktops were completing the projects faster than my large workstations. For a test a ran the same small project area (approx. 3.5 acres)Ā on a workstation and a desktop PC. To my surprise the difference was roughly the PC ran roughly 70 minutes and the workstation took over 6 hours. According to the quality report the PC had a total 3331 seconds and the workstation had 9294 seconds for the same project. Any advice on what might be cause the issue or how to speed the workstations up. The virtual machines were in line with the workstation. Every thing else runs much faster on the workstations but Pix4D.So any help or advice would be greatly appreciated.
Workstation
CPU - Dual Xeon E5 2620 @2.00GHz
CPU Cooler -unknown
GPU - 2559MB Nvidia Quadro 5000
RAM Amount 32GB DDR3
RAM Speed - @531MHZ
Hard Drive or SSD- Combo -1TB Toshiba Dt01ACA100 (sata) - 120 GB Hitachi HFS120G32TND-N1A2A (ssd)
Motherboard Model -Hewlett-Packard 158A
Operating system -Windows 10 pro
Desktop PC
CPU - Intel Core i7 @3.40GHz
CPU Cooler -unknown
GPU - Intel HD Graphics 530
RAM Amount 12GB Dual ChannelĀ
RAM Speed - @1063 MHz
Hard Drive or SSD- Combo -1TB Seagate ST1000DX001-1NS162 (SATA)
Motherboard Model -ASUSTEK Computer inc M32CD
Operating system -Windows 10 pro
Joe,
You didnāt say if it was a particular step that was taking the time, but you should read this if you havenāt already. Using the correct settings for my two machines that have Quadro GPUs resulted in a huge reduction in overall project processing time.
Tom,
Each step is taking approx. 2.5 times longer according to the Quality Report except the DSM took 2 hours compared to 10 min on the PC. I read what you posted and did that. I will try to reprocess it right now. Iāll let you know how it goes. Thanks!
Other threads and multiple users all report desktops far outperforming servers. Simply donāt use server hardware, I know that isnāt what you want to hear but that is just where Pix4D is right now.
Tom,
After making the changes you suggested I processed a large dataset on the workstation that had recently taken 27 hours to process, now took 5 hours to complete. That is freaking amazing. Thanks so much. Now IĀ have to figure out how to do it on the other workstations with different video cards. This has been huge for me.
Yes, I went through the same concern with my Quadro cards - I was quite disappointed at first. Then I learned about optimizing the 3D settings and it made all the difference in the world. Iām glad it helped you.
One other thing to be aware of: I found when I updated the GPU driver, it reverted back to the default settings and I had to go in and make the changes again.
Marcus
I did get I built. Had it overclocked to 5Ghz and It was running well on smaller projects. I tried some of my larger projects it would crash so I clocked it to 4.5Ghz on all cores and it is working well. I am re running my test that I tried and will have some numbers later tonight.
Brian
Donāt forget the cost per performance comparison of desktop vs. server and GeForce vs. Quadro.
I suppose if you already have the $15,000 server laying around not doing anything then it is cheaper than spending $6,000 on a desktop.
And it isnāt that I hate servers, in fact one particular server CPU has high enough clock speed that my next build will it so I can get more RAM but I know it is impossible to beat the cost per performance of my desktop.
So the 8700k overclocked to 4.5Ghz on all cores is running 20% faster then the 6700k clocked at 4.2Ghz. I did have it overclocked to 5Ghz and ran some standard benchmarks with great results but once I ran my larger projects with pix4D it would crash it. 4.5Ghz is where it will run well at the moment.
I am going to send my processor off to have it delidded which should allow it to run at 5Ghz without the heat problems. I will re run the test at that point to see the change.
Here is a part list of my build. https://pcpartpicker.com/list/NsC3zMĀ
Cost is about $3100
I somewhat have to wonder if Pix4D is actually more like other image processing software in that there are severely diminished returns after a certain point when it comes to processors and video cards. Just looking at some other threads where 1070ās have been benchmarked in Pix4D against Titan xP/1080Ti and less than 3% difference in processing speed was found, I have to wonder if itās the same on the CPU end. Itās quite possible that Pix4D simply isnāt optimized for the very top end processing speeds.Ā
On that note has anyone here compared 3000 mHz DDR4 ram to say 4200 mHz DDR4? Even better, maybe M2 drives to Optane drives? In both cases there are large gains to be had in some of the other software I run, much larger than those found between an overclocked i7, Threadripper, or i9 chip. Iām going to be upgrading my current computer this summer with both faster memory and faster scratch drives. Iām curious to see if thatās where the best gains can be made.Ā
I noticed a solid 30% or more speed improvement moving from a Core i7 and GTX1060 to Core i9 and GTX1080Ti.Ā I also have faster M2 drives, faster RAM and 128GB of RAM vs 64GB of RAM in the newer system.
It was a $2,000 price premium for the newer system but I can also take advantage of the highest settings with the increased RAM and VRAM.Ā For my projects around 100 gigapixels, it was well worth the increased cost.Ā Other types of projects and sizes will have different results so nobody can really provide exact hardware solutions.
@Brain Young Thanks for the results. How do you think it compares at 4.5GHz to the 7900x? Similar results or is the 7900x still faster?
Titan V anyone, hehehe!