29 May
2006
29 May
'06
4:49 p.m.
Slashdot recently mentioned the following FFT via GPU library:
http://gamma.cs.unc.edu/GPUFFTW/index.html
(slashdot article) http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/06/05/29/1424213.shtml
it has a custom license, which seems friendly enough, but i'd prefer GPL.
--
daneasley(a)gmail.com
dan(a)towndowner.com dan(a)burntpossum.com
http://towndowner.com http://burntpossum.com
29 May
29 May
9 p.m.
On Mon, 29 May, 2006 at 04:49PM -0400, Dan Easley spake thus:
Slashdot recently mentioned the following FFT via GPU
library:
http://gamma.cs.unc.edu/GPUFFTW/index.html
(slashdot article)
http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/06/05/29/1424213.shtml
it has a custom license, which seems friendly enough, but i'd prefer GPL.
It would be nice if fftw switched to this when it was available.
Or would it? Maybe that would cause too much heterogeneity of
platform. Small changes from one system to another (ATI instead of
nVidia, for example) could change performance drastically. You'd be
unable to rely on an "average" level of performance. I might write
something nifty with my nVidia card and it be unusable by some
significant percentage of people because they just can't run it that
fast.
I dunno. What does everyone think? It's nice, but should we use it?
James
9:14 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
james(a)dis-dot-dat.net escribió:
On Mon, 29 May, 2006 at 04:49PM -0400, Dan Easley
spake thus:
My thoughts exactly... Given the great degree of variation in terms of
raw horsepower in graphics cards, especially the ones from the two
major vendors (ATi and nVidia), say you wrote something with a 7900,
how would a GF 4 440 MX, or an R9200 play that back?
Slashdot recently mentioned the following FFT via
GPU library:
http://gamma.cs.unc.edu/GPUFFTW/index.html
(slashdot article)
http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/06/05/29/1424213.shtml
it has a custom license, which seems friendly enough, but i'd
prefer GPL.
It would be nice if fftw switched to this when it was available.
Or would it? Maybe that would cause too much heterogeneity of
platform. Small changes from one system to another (ATI instead of
nVidia, for example) could change performance drastically. You'd
be unable to rely on an "average" level of performance. I might
write something nifty with my nVidia card and it be unusable by
some significant percentage of people because they just can't run
it that fast.
I dunno. What does everyone think? It's nice, but should we use
it?
James
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFEe507XM+XOp70dwoRAv2/AKCJCfBG21Nb7HTX0tfanJiOmy/WxwCfWVKz
wF3aS6Y44vhcSRXbklrosG8=
=BkB3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
11:58 p.m.
james(a)dis-dot-dat.net writes:
What does everyone think?
It's a hobbyist solution, in my opinion. It's not a scalable general
solution; it's special purpose computing.
Push for more FP power in CPUs';).
There's much power in the GPU, though; which sucks.
--
Esben Stien is b0ef@e s a
http://www. s t n m
irc://irc. b - i . e/%23contact
sip:b0ef@ e e
jid:b0ef@ n n
30 May
30 May
5:16 a.m.
Hallo,
Esben Stien hat gesagt: // Esben Stien wrote:
james(a)dis-dot-dat.net writes:
I agree: The GPUs by NVidia/Ati are powerful DSP chips. But they also
come in very expensive packages easily reaching 400 or 500 Eurodollar.
That's more than a midlevel general purpose CPU including RAM.
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
What does everyone think?
It's a hobbyist solution, in my opinion. It's not a scalable general
solution; it's special purpose computing. 
6:44 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: FFT on GPU
On 5/30/06, Frank Barknecht <fbar(a)footils.org> wrote:
Hallo,
Esben Stien hat gesagt: // Esben Stien wrote:
2 6600LE Nvidia cards (SLI), 256 mb per card. AUD56 i.e 33 euro. (how
much i paid) So 2 of them, 512 mb ram, and to really damn fast dsp
chips on a pci-e buss for 66 euro. Umm..... that beats any midlevel
cpu by so much. The cheapest amd64 chip here is the $165 AUD 939
3000+. Or you can have 2 nvidias and a amd64 dual core chip in one
machine... compare that to the cheapest smp machines.
Loki
james(a)dis-dot-dat.net writes:
I agree: The GPUs by NVidia/Ati are powerful DSP chips. But they also
come in very expensive packages easily reaching 400 or 500 Eurodollar.
That's more than a midlevel general purpose CPU including RAM.
What does everyone think?
It's a hobbyist solution, in my opinion. It's not a scalable general
solution; it's special purpose computing.
7 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: FFT on GPU
Hallo,
Loki Davison hat gesagt: // Loki Davison wrote:
2 6600LE Nvidia cards (SLI), 256 mb per card. AUD56
i.e 33 euro. (how
much i paid) So 2 of them, 512 mb ram, and to really damn fast dsp
chips on a pci-e buss for 66 euro.
Okay, I should have checked prices first, didn't know that some cards
are so cheap now. I was mislead because a friend just yesterday bought
a card in the range I mentioned first.
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
7:12 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: FFT on GPU
On 5/30/06, Frank Barknecht <fbar(a)footils.org> wrote:
Hallo,
Loki Davison hat gesagt: // Loki Davison wrote:
You can pretty much spend as little or as much as you want. The 6600le
isn't the cheapest nvidia/ati though. The crap shared memory ones are
much cheaper.
2 6600LE Nvidia cards (SLI), 256 mb per card.
AUD56 i.e 33 euro. (how
much i paid) So 2 of them, 512 mb ram, and to really damn fast dsp
chips on a pci-e buss for 66 euro.
Okay, I should have checked prices first, didn't know that some cards
are so cheap now. I was mislead because a friend just yesterday bought
a card in the range I mentioned first.
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
9:04 a.m.
On Tue, 30 May, 2006 at 07:57AM +0200, Esben Stien spake thus:
james(a)dis-dot-dat.net writes:
But don't we count as hobbyists? Doing special things?
What does everyone think?
It's a hobbyist solution, in my opinion. It's not a scalable general
solution; it's special purpose computing. Push for more FP power in CPUs';).
There's much power in the GPU, though; which sucks.
My "real" job involves graphics (surface reconstruction and such) and
I've wondered, in the past, if I could push a lot more vertex
processing onto the card. But I can't, because I use a range of
machines and it's useless if I can run something nice and smooth at
home and not at work, or the other way around.
But it's tempting.
James
29 May
29 May
9:44 p.m.
On Mon, 2006-05-29 at 16:49 -0400, Dan Easley wrote:
Slashdot recently mentioned the following FFT via GPU
library:
http://gamma.cs.unc.edu/GPUFFTW/index.html
(slashdot article) http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/06/05/29/1424213.shtml
it has a custom license, which seems friendly enough, but i'd prefer GPL.
Looking at the list of sponsors, I don't doubt that the performance is
impressive, but where are the benchmark numbers?
Lee
9:47 p.m.
On Mon, 2006-05-29 at 21:44 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
Looking at the list of sponsors, I don't doubt
that the performance is
impressive, but where are the benchmark numbers?
Sorry, I am an idiot - I just found them. But they don't publish the
methodology ;-)
Can anyone else with one of the supported GPUs replicate their numbers?
Lee
10:12 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: FFT on GPU
On 5/30/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2006-05-29 at 21:44 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
I've got a 6600le 256mb nvidia but no opteron/xeon to graph against ;)
Does this mean i won't get picked on for using the (much nicer) closed
nvidia drivers this time? ;)
Loki
Looking at the list of sponsors, I don't
doubt that the performance is
impressive, but where are the benchmark numbers?
Sorry, I am an idiot - I just found them. But they don't publish the
methodology ;-)
Can anyone else with one of the supported GPUs replicate their numbers?
Lee 
30 May
30 May
7:38 a.m.
On Monday 29 May 2006 22:49, Dan Easley wrote:
Slashdot recently mentioned the following FFT via GPU
library:
http://gamma.cs.unc.edu/GPUFFTW/index.html
(slashdot article)
http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/06/05/29/1424213.shtml
it has a custom license, which seems friendly enough, but i'd prefer GPL.
Mmm, only non-commercial use.
If I interpret this correctly this prohibits creating music on a professional
basis using tools based on this.
Not that I have any such possibilities, still it's a serious restriction.
/Robert
6904
days inactive
6905
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
12 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Dan Easley -
Esben Stien -
Frank Barknecht -
Gian Paolo Mureddu -
james＠dis-dot-dat.net -
Lee Revell -
Loki Davison -
Robert Jonsson