YOUR ACCOUNT

Rachel Duim
So Called Tortured Artist

Posts: 2498
Filters: 188
I've been monitoring Filter Forge 6 beta on a MacBook Pro (Intel i7 processor, 4 cores, 8 threads) and have noticed that CPU usage according to the top utility run from the command line yields results that I don't completely understand.

Average CPU usage according to top:
Impressionist Curve - 160% - Bomber+ with image/arc tangent in loop for brush direction,
Impressionist Twist - 300% - Bomber+, relatively simple.
Spectral Mandelbrot 2 - 770% (not kidding) - LUA Script component filter.

These numbers are rough averages. BTW, 800% is the highest value top can return for this processor (8 threads per processor).

In general I found that most filters ran between 160% and 300% that did NOT contain a script component. What does this mean??
Math meets art meets psychedelia.
  Details E-Mail
SpaceRay
SpaceRay

Posts: 12298
Filters: 35
Do you mean that 800% would be telling that it is using all the 8 cpu threads at 100%?

i think that the bomber plus can be explained that is slower than bomber standard

Quote
Rick Duim wrote:
In general I found that most filters ran between 160% and 300% that did NOT contain a script component. What does this mean??


Do you mean that FF 6 does not use at all the full CPU power of the processor and only uses up to a third of it?
  Details E-Mail
Indigo Ray
Adam

Posts: 1442
Filters: 82
That's odd.
On my 4-core Windows computer, according to the task manager:
All four cores are running at 100% (I guess you would call that 400% ?) while Filter Forge is rendering. I don't mean that Filter Forge is using all of my CPU, I mean that Filter Forge + everything else = using all of my CPU. In other words, Filter Forge uses all available CPU that isn't being used by something else.

This has been true since FF 1 if I remember correctly, including on my previous computer, and hasn't changed with FF 6 Beta.
  Details E-Mail
Rachel Duim
So Called Tortured Artist

Posts: 2498
Filters: 188
Yes, Indigo Ray, 400% is four cores. SpaceRay, as for FF using most of the Mac CPU, I'm afraid not. This is a serious issue on the Mac, IMHO.

I did a quick look at FF 5 for top CPU values:
Most filters: 300-400%
Some Bomber+ filters: 150%

I'm thinking that FF does not see the extra "threads" provided by the i7 processor on the Mac. But I do not know the internals, so I'll leave this to the experts...
Math meets art meets psychedelia.
  Details E-Mail
LexArt
LexArt

Posts: 256
Thanks Rick Duim for making this tests of monitoring CPU on mac and that gives this bad results showing that FF 6 does not use all the cores of the CPU, which is very bad

How are you monitoring the CPU, what software are you using?

I think that if this true that does not recognize the additional cores, or is unable to use the full CPU is a very bad thing, at least on Mac
  Details E-Mail
Skybase
2D/3D Generalist

Posts: 4025
Filters: 76
Quote
which is very bad


This is kinda typical for FilterForge and many other programs alike (for example, AE often doesn't use all cores to render stuff out even if it were advertised that it's multi-threaded). I never took this as a bad thing, let a lone don't see the reason to stigmatize it as wrong but it does raise some questions in regards to how the program handles multi-threaded renders.

It might be worth understanding it for future reference.
  Details E-Mail

Join Our Community!

Filter Forge has a thriving, vibrant, knowledgeable user community. Feel free to join us and have fun!

33,711 Registered Users
+18 new in 30 days!

153,533 Posts
+38 new in 30 days!

15,348 Topics
+73 new in year!

Create an Account

Online Users Last minute:

25 unregistered users.