Hi, On 05/05/2015 18:12, martin brinkmann wrote:
does something like this exist? afaik not, but i think it would be useful to have some more or less objective and comparable method to measure how well a system is suited for running pd. there was a test patch for rjdj on the ipod/phone which consisted of simply as much osc~-objects as the device could handle. that worked quite well for checking if a patch would run on the device or not, but i think it might not cover all possible properties of a system.
One problem with (totally un-scientific) benchmarking I've seen on Linux (on laptops and with Jack Audio) is that there are a few factors sucha as cpu scaling, wifi on/off, swappiness.. and of course type od soundard used i.e. all the 'audio on linux' stuff which an influence performance. I'm talking here mostly about 'audio benchmarking' more thn CPU etc. which means for instance how low latency you can get with a rather CPU intensive patch without (too many) xruns etc.
With heavy patches I have also noticed dramatic performance differences with different gui activity: e.g. the more number boxes, sliders etc. being 'continuously' updated (in the order of milliseconds) the worst performance is. Very hard to benchmark though because there are many factors.
Add GEM (and video cards, drivers.. ) and 'benchmarking' probably becomes a sort of black magic.
This doesn't really answer the question but thought it would be useful to throw in some additional complexity :)
Lorenzo. _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
