IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

17 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 10 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
FLACCL: CUDA-enabled FLAC encoder by Gregory S. Chudov (prev. FlaCuda), Formerly "lossless codecs and CUDA"
SCOTU
post Aug 4 2010, 08:31
Post #176





Group: Members
Posts: 118
Joined: 9-July 10
Member No.: 82156



Hard drive shouldn't need to really move back and forth for different threads unless they're taking from drastically different parts of the disk on a high priority basis. Hard drives and OS' have a request queue that will make efficient sweeps of the disk and even prefetch data around what it's looking at, so it usually doesn't need to do much moving assuming your keep your HDD defragmented.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
modernartistry
post Aug 24 2010, 21:11
Post #177





Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 29-May 10
Member No.: 80969



@Bad Monkey
I found out something but test will follow later. There are speed differences when I use different encoded sources. So when I convert a wav or ape or flac file with flacuda there a differences in speed. Has something to do with the preparation of a track before flacuda encodes it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ChronoSphere
post Aug 25 2010, 20:54
Post #178





Group: Members
Posts: 399
Joined: 11-March 07
Member No.: 41384



wav is uncompressed, flac/ape has to be decompressed. While flac decompression is very fast, ape's isn't - it's quite low actually (60x or something?), that's why it takes longer than wav to convert.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Aug 25 2010, 21:16
Post #179





Group: Members
Posts: 950
Joined: 7-October 01
Member No.: 235



Wonder why Mr. Chudov doesn´t respond in his threads since a while. I hope you are fine Gregory and enjoy holidays slurping some Cocktail smile.gif

Now what i want to say. Regarding Cuda, i feel already a bit dissapointed. Since it is an Nvidia only thingy i wonder why even for the first next generation cards the code doesn´t work anymore. Of cause the newer cards have much changes in hardware but...

I start to get a friend of this Opencl. Maybe we will see a Flacocl some day.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Nowings69
post Sep 5 2010, 02:45
Post #180





Group: Members
Posts: 95
Joined: 22-December 09
From: nicyoume
Member No.: 76223



@ Gregory S. Chudov
I designed FlaCuda logo with respect original logo.
Thank you very much


Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Maggi
post Sep 7 2010, 14:31
Post #181





Group: Members
Posts: 119
Joined: 31-May 07
Member No.: 43892



QUOTE (RED_404 @ Apr 24 2010, 09:44) *
I'm getting "Error : Exception of type 'GASS.CUDA.CUDAException' was thrown."

[...]


I get the same error on my GTX460 ... is there anything I could do to help tackling this issue ?

Cheers,
Maggi

/edit (found an updated version)

maybe this doc could be helpful ?
http://developer.download.nvidia.com/compu...bilityGuide.pdf

This post has been edited by Maggi: Sep 7 2010, 14:38
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dewdude
post Sep 8 2010, 21:50
Post #182





Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 6-May 03
Member No.: 6419



I'm VERY late to this party. I only found out about this encoder yesterday and for the longest time had no CUDA enabled hardware.

I'm currently running a GeForce GTX260M with 1GB DDR3 (that's dedicated video ram, not shared with system) in my Asus laptop which has a C2D 2.53 P8700 and actually uses a custom desktop chipset. The GPU though is underclocked to 500/1250/800 and i'm not arsed to restore it to defaults.

Anyway...here are my results from FLACuda encoding a rather large WAV of Dark Side Of The Moon to -8. This is for the GPU only encode:

QUOTE
C:\Users\Jay\Desktop\FlaCuda091>cuetools.flacuda.exe -8 "Untitled_mixdown.wav" -o dsotm.flac
FlaCuda#.91, Copyright © 2009 Gregory S. Chudov.
This is free software under the GNU GPLv3+ license; There is NO WARRANTY, to
the extent permitted by law. <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/> for details.
Filename : Untitled_mixdown.wav
File Info : 44100kHz; 2 channel; 16 bit; 01:41:47.0100000
Results : 192.97x; 615833373 bytes in 00:00:31.6468101 seconds;


I also ran tests with --slow-gpu and in addition to that..adding --cpu-threads 2. I will mention that my CPU by default runs in the usual "as-needed" clock mode...so auto-scales depending on requirements. I didn't look at the clock when it was going up...but I can imagine that it likely jumped to the full 2.5ghz when doing this. The result speed without --cpu-threads 2 was 234.87x, I didn't feel the need to list it for such a small variance.

QUOTE
C:\Users\Jay\Desktop\FlaCuda091>cuetools.flacuda.exe --slow-gpu --cpu-threads 2 -8 "Untitled_mixdown.wav" -o dsotm2.flac
FlaCuda#.91, Copyright © 2009 Gregory S. Chudov.
This is free software under the GNU GPLv3+ license; There is NO WARRANTY, to
the extent permitted by law. <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/> for details.
Filename : Untitled_mixdown.wav
File Info : 44100kHz; 2 channel; 16 bit; 01:41:47.0100000
Results : 234.98x; 615867393 bytes in 00:00:25.9894865 seconds;


I wanted to see what it could do with 96/24 data, but sadly it's limited to 16-bit audio...so while this may work great for archiving CD's, it won't outright replace all my FLAC usage.

I'd output times and stuff from the standard FLAC encoder, but i see no way to get it to display any data of such and assume i need some kind of special version, which I don't feel like tracking down. However, based on the somewhat inaccurate method of a stopwatch and the flac.exe CLI encoder....it was no where near this kind of speed.

Excellent job though. I didn't think I'd see flac encode that fast at level 8.

This post has been edited by dewdude: Sep 8 2010, 21:52
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Sep 11 2010, 00:04
Post #183





Group: Members
Posts: 950
Joined: 7-October 01
Member No.: 235



Lately i dropped in a Quadcore in my old fellow 965P board. Just have to show you how it looks when i encode a cd and even with verify. Just look at the "Time" column closely smile.gif



Edit: together with my GTX260 i mentioned earlier in this thread.

This post has been edited by Wombat: Sep 11 2010, 00:08
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Oct 9 2010, 03:08
Post #184





Group: Members
Posts: 950
Joined: 7-October 01
Member No.: 235




Should that have been it?
Another great idea fading?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gregory S. Chudo...
post Oct 15 2010, 20:55
Post #185





Group: Developer
Posts: 683
Joined: 2-October 08
From: Ottawa
Member No.: 59035



Sorry for slacking, i've been extremely busy at work lately and still don't have time to answer all PMs and such. Meanwhile, here's a beta version of OpenCL flac encoder for ATI/AMD GPUs. I only tested it on Radeon HD 5450, which is extremely slow. No idea if this thing will be much faster than CPU-based flac encoders when using more advanced GPUs. My guess is we won't see such speeds as with CUDA.

This post has been edited by Gregory S. Chudov: Oct 15 2010, 20:55
Attached File(s)
Attached File  flaccl01.rar ( 105.61K ) Number of downloads: 151
 


--------------------
CUETools 2.1.4
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Case
post Oct 16 2010, 00:17
Post #186





Group: Developer (Donating)
Posts: 2136
Joined: 19-October 01
From: Finland
Member No.: 322



Seems to be about the same speed on my Radeon HD 5870 as FlaCUDA v0.4 was on my GTX 285.
Attached Image


This post has been edited by Case: Oct 16 2010, 00:17
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gregory S. Chudo...
post Oct 16 2010, 00:18
Post #187





Group: Developer
Posts: 683
Joined: 2-October 08
From: Ottawa
Member No.: 59035



That's good news. I thought it was worse. Thanks a lot!


--------------------
CUETools 2.1.4
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Oct 16 2010, 23:43
Post #188





Group: Members
Posts: 950
Joined: 7-October 01
Member No.: 235



Nice!
Sadly i can´t get it running on my GTX260. The driver version is 258.96 and should support Opencl 1.0
I get this error: Build failed with errorcode BULD_PROGRAM_FAILURE
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gregory S. Chudo...
post Oct 17 2010, 03:43
Post #189





Group: Developer
Posts: 683
Joined: 2-October 08
From: Ottawa
Member No.: 59035



OpenCL doesn't automatically mean that it runs on any GPU. This is a version for AMD GPUs. There will be a combined version later.


--------------------
CUETools 2.1.4
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Oct 17 2010, 22:09
Post #190





Group: Members
Posts: 950
Joined: 7-October 01
Member No.: 235



Ah ok, don´t hurry.
I just wonder what standards are for these days. You programmers must have a really hard time doing compatibility checks these days. For me noob Opencl is Opencl, shouldn´t matter what brand.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Destroid
post Oct 18 2010, 07:34
Post #191





Group: Members
Posts: 544
Joined: 4-June 02
Member No.: 2220



I applaud the effort for getting OpenCL projects going. I suppose having an the AMD graphics adapter is my own issue but I don't think Stream/CUDA being sectioned-off to their respective brands can help the concept of "parallel processing is the future."

Gregory: would you mind commenting on your experience dealing with OpenCL vs. CUDA? I'd be interested to hear what pro's and con's are from a developer.

And I might add that the title of this topic is becoming less accurate wink.gif


--------------------
"Something bothering you, Mister Spock?"
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gregory S. Chudo...
post Oct 18 2010, 08:36
Post #192





Group: Developer
Posts: 683
Joined: 2-October 08
From: Ottawa
Member No.: 59035



Well, the languages themselves are very similar. 99% of concepts are the same, sometimes renamed for no apparent reason. They could have just adopted CUDA as a standard, but i guess that was unacceptable for political reasons. Main added feature in OpenCL is language support for SSE-like vector operations, which are needed to effectively use AMD GPUs and probably Intel's future SandyBridge architecture.

Unfortunately, OpenCL cannot completely hide the differences in hardware architectures. You still have to write the same algorithm twice for NVIDIA and AMD hardware, or suffer unacceptable performance penalties. But at least you can reuse some parts and more easily write software that supports both.

AMD's OpenCL compiler and documentation in their current state were a huge disappointment. About half of the time i spent porting FlaCUDA to OpenCL was wasted on combating numerous compiler errors and such. CUDA had it problems too, but nothing like this, for example.


--------------------
CUETools 2.1.4
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Maurits
post Oct 25 2010, 22:46
Post #193





Group: Members
Posts: 352
Joined: 30-September 05
From: London, Europe
Member No.: 24805



QUOTE (Gregory S. Chudov @ Oct 18 2010, 08:36) *
Well, the languages themselves are very similar. 99% of concepts are the same, sometimes renamed for no apparent reason. They could have just adopted CUDA as a standard, but i guess that was unacceptable for political reasons. Main added feature in OpenCL is language support for SSE-like vector operations, which are needed to effectively use AMD GPUs and probably Intel's future SandyBridge architecture.

Unfortunately, OpenCL cannot completely hide the differences in hardware architectures. You still have to write the same algorithm twice for NVIDIA and AMD hardware, or suffer unacceptable performance penalties. But at least you can reuse some parts and more easily write software that supports both.

AMD's OpenCL compiler and documentation in their current state were a huge disappointment. About half of the time i spent porting FlaCUDA to OpenCL was wasted on combating numerous compiler errors and such. CUDA had it problems too, but nothing like this, for example.

Considering OpenCL is much newer than CUDA, is still developing (recently from version 1.0 to 1.1), the SDKs are still improving and the hardware manufacturers are still improving their implementation of OpenCL in the drivers, do you think this is just a temporary phase?

Could it be that eventually OpenCL is close to CUDA in performance and the multi-vendor opportunities make a small hit worth it?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gregory S. Chudo...
post Oct 25 2010, 23:07
Post #194





Group: Developer
Posts: 683
Joined: 2-October 08
From: Ottawa
Member No.: 59035



I sure hope so, but it might take a couple of years before it reaches maturity.


--------------------
CUETools 2.1.4
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
alvaro84
post Oct 26 2010, 14:22
Post #195





Group: Members
Posts: 128
Joined: 9-August 06
Member No.: 33830



And what about DirectCompute?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gregory S. Chudo...
post Oct 27 2010, 14:20
Post #196





Group: Developer
Posts: 683
Joined: 2-October 08
From: Ottawa
Member No.: 59035



To be honest, i don't know much about it, except that it's not likely to be available outside of Windows world, so it doesn't sound promising.


--------------------
CUETools 2.1.4
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
viktor
post Oct 27 2010, 23:47
Post #197





Group: Members
Posts: 297
Joined: 17-November 06
Member No.: 37682



i've installed catalyst 10.10 APP version for my hd4350 on windows 7 x64.

when i try to encode a wav file, it keeps saying:

Error: Build failed with error code BUILD_PROGRAM_FAILURE

the same file encodes fine with flac.exe. any ideas?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SCOTU
post Oct 28 2010, 21:39
Post #198





Group: Members
Posts: 118
Joined: 9-July 10
Member No.: 82156



QUOTE (Gregory S. Chudov @ Oct 27 2010, 09:20) *
To be honest, i don't know much about it, except that it's not likely to be available outside of Windows world, so it doesn't sound promising.


Microsoft is actually porting DirectX to Linux, no clue when that'll actually happen, though.

edit: correction, it may only be Direct3D.

This post has been edited by SCOTU: Oct 28 2010, 21:40
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Lucho
post Oct 29 2010, 08:02
Post #199





Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 19-November 08
Member No.: 62733



QUOTE (viktor @ Oct 28 2010, 01:47) *
i've installed catalyst 10.10 APP version for my hd4350 on windows 7 x64.

when i try to encode a wav file, it keeps saying:

Error: Build failed with error code BUILD_PROGRAM_FAILURE

the same file encodes fine with flac.exe. any ideas?


Probably you didnt install OpenCL driver, look at this page: http://sites.amd.com/us/game/downloads/Pages/downloads.aspx ,choose your OS and than at "individual packages"
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
viktor
post Oct 29 2010, 10:26
Post #200





Group: Members
Posts: 297
Joined: 17-November 06
Member No.: 37682



QUOTE (Lucho @ Oct 29 2010, 09:02) *
Probably you didnt install OpenCL driver, look at this page: http://sites.amd.com/us/game/downloads/Pages/downloads.aspx ,choose your OS and than at "individual packages"


the APP version contains that.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

17 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 10 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 16th April 2014 - 18:00