Stereo Tool :: Stereo Tool 6.00

About OpenGL etc.: Processing will be very difficult to convert. It's probably possible, but remember that I need a 100-times performance boost to do what I described before - anything less than that doesn't work. And still a 100 times performance boost would only work for latency 512. So this is not going to be easy.

I have seen the results of people who have tried to convert complex video processing algorithms to the GPU, who couldn't get much more than a 2-4 times performance boost...

Great you found something now. What for program do you use to show this?

Quote:

I participated in Milkyway@Home, although with only a CPU. 100x happened there, possibly more, but a lot of their math was / is integer math. For the FP portion, they did require Double Precision though...

Much depends on the type of processing that's needed. In case of Stereo Tool, I have douzens of different filters that all require the output of the previous filters (so they cannot be run in parallel), but also in some cases the output of the previous step of the same filter (so that also cannot be done in parallel). That makes it difficult to use threading in this case. Although some pipelining is possible - but usually GPU's are used to all do the same thing at a different portion of the data.

We have an "O"
We have an "O"
We have a "P"
We have an "S"
We have "OOPS"!

Hans, are you ok ?
LSD ?

I changed "performance" settings from 'Programs' to Background services. But that not helped at all.

Author:	Brian [ Mon Jan 31, 2011 3:05 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Stereo Tool 6.00
Quote: About OpenGL etc.: Processing will be very difficult to convert. It's probably possible, but remember that I need a 100-times performance boost to do what I described before - anything less than that doesn't work. And still a 100 times performance boost would only work for latency 512. So this is not going to be easy. I have seen the results of people who have tried to convert complex video processing algorithms to the GPU, who couldn't get much more than a 2-4 times performance boost... I participated in Milkyway@Home, although with only a CPU. 100x happened there, possibly more, but a lot of their math was / is integer math. For the FP portion, they did require Double Precision though...

Author:	hvz [ Mon Jan 31, 2011 3:19 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Stereo Tool 6.00
Quote: Great you found something now. What for program do you use to show this? Just logging. There's a very precise timer (see QueryHighPerformanceTimer) that I'm calling at the start and end of the processing, and then I log the difference.

Author:	hvz [ Mon Jan 31, 2011 3:21 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Stereo Tool 6.00
Quote: Quote: About OpenGL etc.: Processing will be very difficult to convert. It's probably possible, but remember that I need a 100-times performance boost to do what I described before - anything less than that doesn't work. And still a 100 times performance boost would only work for latency 512. So this is not going to be easy. I have seen the results of people who have tried to convert complex video processing algorithms to the GPU, who couldn't get much more than a 2-4 times performance boost... I participated in Milkyway@Home, although with only a CPU. 100x happened there, possibly more, but a lot of their math was / is integer math. For the FP portion, they did require Double Precision though... Much depends on the type of processing that's needed. In case of Stereo Tool, I have douzens of different filters that all require the output of the previous filters (so they cannot be run in parallel), but also in some cases the output of the previous step of the same filter (so that also cannot be done in parallel). That makes it difficult to use threading in this case. Although some pipelining is possible - but usually GPU's are used to all do the same thing at a different portion of the data.

Author:	Gtxx [ Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:17 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Stereo Tool 6.00
Quote: Much depends on the type of processing that's needed. In case of Stereo Tool, I have douzens of different filters that all require the output of the previous filters (so they cannot be run in parallel), but also in some cases the output of the previous step of the same filter (so that also cannot be done in parallel). That makes it difficult to use threading in this case. Although some pipelining is possible - but usually GPU's are used to all do the same thing at a different portion of the data. Thats the problem I found while reading up on DSPs through the GPU. Audio data is hard parallelize... umm whoops lol. you get what I mean. Anyways the good thing about handing off processing to the GPU would be reduced load on the CPU, would it be feasible to separate the process that draws the GUI and the signal processing?

Author:	Bojcha [ Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:18 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Stereo Tool 6.00
ASIO drivers run as background service in Windows. I changed "performance" settings from 'Programs' to Background services. But that not helped at all.

Stereo Tool https://forums.stereotool.com/

Stereo Tool 6.00 https://forums.stereotool.com/viewtopic.php?t=2811	Page 49 of 72

Author:	hvz [ Mon Jan 31, 2011 10:53 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Stereo Tool 6.00
We have an "O" We have an "O" We have a "P" We have an "S" We have "OOPS"! Ok, this is strange. http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/forums ... 91fec83420 http://thedailyreviewer.com/windowsnet/ ... y-10770524 http://www.dreamincode.net/forums/topic ... -resolved/ In short: PostMessage (a command that's used in Stereo Tool among others to indicate that audio has been processed and a screen update would be useful) SHOULD return immediately - but it doesn't. This is exactly what I'm seeing - if I remove the PostMessage() call, I don't see any significant effects from window resizes anymore. Unfortunately no good answers there... So I'm going to have to use a different method to indicate when the window needs to be redrawn. Fix coming up.

Author:	Brian [ Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:04 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Stereo Tool 6.00
Quote: We have an "O" We have an "O" We have a "P" We have an "S" We have "OOPS"! ¿Que pasa?

Author:	michi95 [ Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:06 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Stereo Tool 6.00
Quote: We have an "O" We have an "O" We have a "P" We have an "S" We have "OOPS"! Hans, are you ok ? LSD ? Or does it mean that you have found the error now ?

Author:	Gtxx [ Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:09 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Stereo Tool 6.00
Quote: Hans, are you ok ? LSD ? Lmfao!

Author:	Gtxx [ Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:10 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Stereo Tool 6.00
Quote: I changed "performance" settings from 'Programs' to Background services. But that not helped at all. I never got this option on windows. Is it meant for servers?

Page 49 of 72	All times are UTC+02:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/