[Canberrauav] ODROID-X benchmarks
Matthew Ridley dr.matt.ridley at gmail.com
Thu Nov 15 21:35:23 EST 2012
I finally got things compiling on the quad core ODROID-X, and ran the
cuav/tests/benchmark.py
I ran it alone, two then four concurrently. While there is some
interference between cores, it does appear to scale fairly well.
The full size image operations are obviously hammering the L2 cache.
But the smaller operations are less affected.
These numbers might only make any sense to Tridge, perhaps he has the
benchmarks from the panda board handy ?
also no luck on the multiple USB hosts :-(
/: Bus 02.Port 1: Dev 1, Class=root_hub, Driver=exynos-ohci/3p, 12M
/: Bus 01.Port 1: Dev 1, Class=root_hub, Driver=s5p-ehci/3p, 480M
|__ Port 2: Dev 2, If 0, Class=Hub, Driver=hub/3p, 480M
|__ Port 1: Dev 3, If 0, Class=Hub, Driver=hub/5p, 480M
|__ Port 1: Dev 4, If 0, Class=Vendor Specific Class,
Driver=smsc95xx, 480M
|__ Port 4: Dev 5, If 0, Class=Mass Storage,
Driver=usb-storage, 480M
Benchmark numbers below:
single benchmark:
debayer: 356.4 fps
debayer_full: 100.7 fps
debayer_cv_full: 89.7 fps
RGB2HSV_full: 23.3 fps
RGB2HSV_640: 94.5 fps
rect_extract: 13766.7 fps
SubImage: 14120.3 fps
downsample: 130.9 fps
scan: 43.1 fps
jpeg full quality 30: 31.0 fps 81638 bytes
jpeg full quality 40: 29.9 fps 107238 bytes
jpeg full quality 50: 28.8 fps 131891 bytes
jpeg full quality 60: 27.7 fps 159719 bytes
jpeg full quality 70: 26.1 fps 204228 bytes
jpeg full quality 80: 23.8 fps 284911 bytes
jpeg full quality 90: 19.1 fps 508806 bytes
jpeg full quality 95: 14.8 fps 828852 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 30: 127.6 fps 12602 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 40: 124.5 fps 16897 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 50: 121.4 fps 21529 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 60: 117.8 fps 26837 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 70: 112.5 fps 35289 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 80: 104.2 fps 50595 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 90: 87.6 fps 91981 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 95: 70.0 fps 160635 bytes
thumb 10 quality 85: 7930.2 fps 734 bytes
thumb 20 quality 85: 6911.4 fps 823 bytes
thumb 40 quality 85: 5071.0 fps 1036 bytes
thumb 60 quality 85: 3481.0 fps 1462 bytes
thumb 80 quality 85: 2643.3 fps 1935 bytes
thumb 100 quality 85: 1784.8 fps 2840 bytes
one of 2:
debayer: 288.1 fps
debayer_full: 98.3 fps
debayer_cv_full: 89.5 fps
RGB2HSV_full: 23.2 fps
RGB2HSV_640: 90.8 fps
rect_extract: 11611.8 fps
SubImage: 12294.2 fps
downsample: 116.6 fps
scan: 41.4 fps
jpeg full quality 30: 30.3 fps 81638 bytes
jpeg full quality 40: 29.2 fps 107238 bytes
jpeg full quality 50: 28.2 fps 131891 bytes
jpeg full quality 60: 27.1 fps 159719 bytes
jpeg full quality 70: 25.6 fps 204228 bytes
jpeg full quality 80: 23.3 fps 284911 bytes
jpeg full quality 90: 18.6 fps 508806 bytes
jpeg full quality 95: 14.5 fps 828852 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 30: 124.3 fps 12602 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 40: 121.5 fps 16897 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 50: 118.5 fps 21529 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 60: 114.9 fps 26837 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 70: 109.8 fps 35289 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 80: 101.7 fps 50595 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 90: 85.5 fps 91981 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 95: 70.0 fps 160635 bytes
thumb 10 quality 85: 7894.0 fps 734 bytes
thumb 20 quality 85: 6896.5 fps 823 bytes
thumb 40 quality 85: 5072.8 fps 1036 bytes
thumb 60 quality 85: 3484.3 fps 1462 bytes
thumb 80 quality 85: 2642.3 fps 1935 bytes
thumb 100 quality 85: 1786.6 fps 2840 bytes
one of 4:
debayer: 226.9 fps
debayer_full: 94.7 fps
debayer_cv_full: 85.9 fps
RGB2HSV_full: 22.6 fps
RGB2HSV_640: 86.1 fps
rect_extract: 7923.3 fps
SubImage: 8670.0 fps
downsample: 81.6 fps
scan: 36.5 fps
jpeg full quality 30: 22.7 fps 81638 bytes
jpeg full quality 40: 22.7 fps 107238 bytes
jpeg full quality 50: 22.0 fps 131891 bytes
jpeg full quality 60: 21.3 fps 159719 bytes
jpeg full quality 70: 17.5 fps 204228 bytes
jpeg full quality 80: 18.5 fps 284911 bytes
jpeg full quality 90: 13.7 fps 508806 bytes
jpeg full quality 95: 11.0 fps 828852 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 30: 72.0 fps 12602 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 40: 113.2 fps 16897 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 50: 65.0 fps 21529 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 60: 94.4 fps 26837 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 70: 77.9 fps 35289 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 80: 66.8 fps 50595 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 90: 82.0 fps 91981 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 95: 67.8 fps 160635 bytes
thumb 10 quality 85: 7491.2 fps 734 bytes
thumb 20 quality 85: 6589.8 fps 823 bytes
thumb 40 quality 85: 4817.9 fps 1036 bytes
thumb 60 quality 85: 3293.9 fps 1462 bytes
thumb 80 quality 85: 2480.5 fps 1935 bytes
thumb 100 quality 85: 1676.7 fps 2840 bytes
[Canberrauav] ODROID-X benchmarks
Andrew Tridgell tridge at samba.org
Fri Nov 16 06:16:47 EST 2012
Hi Matt,
> Benchmark numbers below:
those are great results! A single core of your Odroid-X is more than
twice as fast for the operations we care about than the pandaboard, and
for some operations it is 3x as fast. Here are the results on the
pandaboard we used in the competition:
debayer: 177.4 fps
debayer_full: 42.9 fps
debayer_cv_full: 36.7 fps
RGB2HSV_full: 10.4 fps
RGB2HSV_640: 41.8 fps
rect_extract: 3296.4 fps
SubImage: 5064.3 fps
downsample: 66.2 fps
scan: 15.5 fps
jpeg full quality 30: 11.7 fps 99488 bytes
jpeg full quality 40: 10.9 fps 131725 bytes
jpeg full quality 50: 10.3 fps 164189 bytes
jpeg full quality 60: 9.7 fps 200547 bytes
jpeg full quality 70: 8.9 fps 257939 bytes
jpeg full quality 80: 7.9 fps 365157 bytes
jpeg full quality 90: 6.3 fps 641580 bytes
jpeg full quality 95: 5.2 fps 982652 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 30: 49.3 fps 16354 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 40: 47.1 fps 21613 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 50: 45.2 fps 27261 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 60: 42.8 fps 33943 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 70: 40.2 fps 44550 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 80: 36.1 fps 62991 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 90: 29.3 fps 116587 bytes
jpeg 640 quality 95: 24.1 fps 195916 bytes
thumb 10 quality 85: 2928.3 fps 761 bytes
thumb 20 quality 85: 2503.1 fps 847 bytes
thumb 40 quality 85: 1824.4 fps 1149 bytes
thumb 60 quality 85: 1213.6 fps 1911 bytes
thumb 80 quality 85: 889.2 fps 2762 bytes
thumb 100 quality 85: 605.4 fps 4114 bytes
That is going to give us a lot more CPU power to play with! I suspect
with this board we could do the scanning at full resolution (1280x960),
which should allow us to fly higher with the same ability to pick out
small objects.
I also see that the Exynos5 SoC will have SATA support - so next year we
might start seeing boards like this but with SATA. Very nice!
Cheers, Tridge
Copyright 2012 http://canberrauav.org.au/