[ptx] hugin, nona, enblend on amd64

[Mike Runge]

Congrats, Pablo.

You should compare that against the PTStitcher with/without Fulvio Seniores
fast pano12.dll. I never measured the times needed, but I think nona is still
a lot faster :-)

best, mike

On 8/26/2004, "Pablo d'Angelo" <pablo.dangelo at web.de> wrote:

>Hi!
>
>Since I own an Athlon64 3Ghz, and I have only used it in 32 bit mode so
far,
>I installed Suse Linux 9.1 for AMD64, compiled all needed stuff with gcc
3.3
>for amd64 and ran two tests.
>
>Compilation:
>1. wxwindows 2.4.2 worked fine (compiled from source)
>2. boost       (fine, supplied by suse)
>3. panotools   (needed to add -fPIC to the compiler flags)
>4. hugin & nona (needed a few minor changes, which I will checkin later)
>5. enblend    (worked fine)
>
>
>I used nona to remap a 24 image pano ( 11152 x 5483) to multiple tiff and
>enblend to blend it. here are the times, for both Suse 9.1 (AMD64) and
>debian unstable (i386, also gcc 3.3).
>
>           AMD64               i386
>nona
> real    7m22.307s          8m13.001s
> user    6m52.438s          7m56.454s
> sys     0m7.081s           0m8.480s
>
>enblend
> real    17m19.074s          21m22.067s
> user    6m59.866s           7m17.790s
> sys     1m36.806s           0m58.766s
>
>I was quite surprised to see such a huge difference in the "user" time,
>for nona, thats roughly 15% faster.
>
>The enblend benchmark is a lot less significant, since most of the time
>is spend writing to disk. the "user" difference is also only 18 seconds
>here.
>
>ciao
>  Pablo
>
>