Can OpenGL And OpenCL Overhaul Your Photo Editing Experience?

Benchmark Results: Musemage

The amateur family photographer in us was most interested to see how Musemage testing would turn out. Inevitably, we find ourselves at the end of the weekend with dozens of images snapped at some family function or a beach trip or birthday party. While every shot is different, many need bounce flashes toned down, saturation improved, sizes scaled down for emailing, or any number of other alterations. Most often, we blow off this sort of editing because it’s simply too time-intensive. But Musemage offers the promise of reducing such jobs to mere seconds—if it works as promised.

First, we turned to the program’s integrated benchmarking module, a clever nod by the designers toward enthusiasts and reviewers like us. The benchmarking tool loads a sample image pre-stocked inside the application and cycles it through roughly 80 effects. The better the overall processing performance, the higher the score. We can see the huge performance gap between the Radeon HD 7970 card and APU. Clearly, the application does an admirable job of leveraging the GPU for scaling, and circumventing the bus-imposed bottlenecks mentioned by Adobe.

We discovered during testing that Musemage, like Photoshop CS6, does nearly all of its GPU-based acceleration via OpenGL. The only feature Musemage currently codes for OpenCL is HDR processing.

With current drivers, Intel’s HD Graphics 3000 is OpenGL 3.0-compatible (although still lacking OpenCL support), which is why our lowly Intel Core i5 notebook is able to beat every configuration here in software-based HDR processing, even AMD’s FX-8150.

Turn OpenCL back on, though, and results practically drop off the left edge of the chart. It’s a bit odd that our FX-based system with the Radeon HD 7970 card is slightly slowly than the A8 running the same card, but with such fast processing times, 60 milliseconds is probably within an acceptable variance range.

And last up, the test we really wanted to see. As expected, performance scales fairly well up the AMD stack, with the FX/Radeon HD 7970 combo taking about half the time to crunch our eight-image batch as the APU-based notebook did. We were a little surprised to see the Intel notebook slip into the middle of the results, even edging past the desktop A8 configuration leveraging its integrated graphics. This tells us that Musemage is likely coding its OpenGL support for the 3.1 or prior generation, rather than the current 4.x, in order to maximize compatibility with Intel’s large installation base. Note that Intel HD Graphics 4000 supports OpenGL 4.0 and OpenCL 1.1. Still, when you want top OpenGL performance, it’s clear that discrete graphics is the way to fly.

Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
53 comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
    Top Comments
  • ilysaml
    Now Adobe uses both CUDA and OpenCL that's superb.
  • Other Comments
  • ilysaml
    Now Adobe uses both CUDA and OpenCL that's superb.
  • alphaalphaalpha1
    Tahiti is pretty darned fast for compute, especially for the price of the 7900 cards, and if too many applications get proper OpenCL support, then Nvidia might be left behind for a lot of professional GPGPU work if they don't offer similar performance at a similar price point or some other incentive.

    With the 7970 meeting or beating much of the far more expensive Quadro line, Nvidia will have to step up. Maybe a GK114 or a cut-down GK110 will be put into use to counter 7900. I've already seen several forum threads talking about the 7970 being incredible in Maya and some other programs, but since I'm not a GPGPU compute expert, I guess I'm not in the best position to consider this topic on a very advanced level. Would anyone care to comment (or correct me if I made a mistake) about this?
  • A Bad Day
    How many CPUs would it take to match the tested GPUs?
  • blazorthon
    A Bad DayHow many CPUs would it take to match the tested GPUs?


    That would depend on the CPU.
  • esrever
    Would be interesting to compare the i7 ivybridge against trinity in openCL
  • mayankleoboy1
    why no nvidia cards here?
  • mayankleoboy1
    any CUDA vs OpenCL benchmarks?
  • de5_Roy
    can you test like these combos:
    core i5 + 7970
    core i5 hd4000
    trinity + 7970
    trinity apu
    core i7 + 7970
    and core i7 hd 4000, and compare against fx8150 (or piledriver) + 7970.
    it seemed to me as if the apu bottlenecks the 7970 and the 7970 could work better with an intel i5/i7 cpu on the graphical processing workloads.
  • vitornob
    Nvidia cards test please. People needs to know if it's better/faster to go OpenCL or CUDA.
  • bgaimur
    vitornobNvidia cards test please. People needs to know if it's better/faster to go OpenCL or CUDA.


    http://www.streamcomputing.eu/blog/2011-06-22/opencl-vs-cuda-misconceptions/

    CUDA is a dying breed.
  • Anonymous
    no intel or nvidia because for professional editing you need hardware capable of more than gaming...
  • A Bad Day
    blazorthonThat would depend on the CPU.


    2687W: 2P server CPU, 8 core (16 threads), 3.1 GHz (3.8 GHz turbo), and 20 MB of L3 cache.

    Cost per CPU: $1885
  • blazorthon
    nousernameno intel or nvidia because for professional editing you need hardware capable of more than gaming...


    Quadro, Tesla... These are graphics cards that are also capable of more than gaming, even if like alpha said above, many of them aren't always the very fastest such cards for compute performance anymore and most definitely aren't the fastest compute cards for the money.

    A Bad Day2687W: 2P server CPU, 8 core (16 threads), 3.1 GHz (3.8 GHz turbo), and 20 MB of L3 cache.Cost per CPU: $1885


    I'll have a look and see if I can find benchmarks to compare with those done in this article.
  • annymmo
    I'm hoping that OpenCL will make it possible to implement high demanding video codecs for smartphone GPU's.

    This would allow software vendors to implement their video format of choice everywhere while making it able to play fluently everywhere where it matters!
  • annymmo
    And being able to play video's fluently on computers with weak CPU's.
  • blazorthon
    annymmoAnd being able to play video's fluently on computers with weak CPU's.


    What semi-modern computer has a CPU so weak that it can't play video? Even a single core Atom CPU can play video without trouble. I'd be more worried about old GPUs (such as older Atom netbook GPUs and other weak GPUs) not always being able to play modern video very well, not CPUs. Heck, even my almost ten year old laptop with an old P4 is GPU limited in video, not CPU limited.
  • Yuka
    blazorthonWhat semi-modern computer has a CPU so weak that it can't play video? Even a single core Atom CPU can play video without trouble. I'd be more worried about old GPUs (such as older Atom netbook GPUs and other weak GPUs) not always being able to play modern video very well, not CPUs. Heck, even my almost ten year old laptop with an old P4 is GPU limited in video, not CPU limited.


    Prior to the HD3k, Intel wasn't able to play videos decently; only blocky and badly rendered pictures of something moving on the screen. Period.

    And no, unless the Atoms are on the ION platform, they can't play any video in more than SD format. Let alone apply filters for re-size.

    And to directly answer your question. Core2 Duos on laptops were not able to play videos decently and nothing before that was able to, where any iGPU from nVidia or AMD was able to prior to the C2D's in notebooks. I'm pretty sure in desktop was not that much different.

    Cheers!
  • blazorthon
    YukaPrior to the HD3k, Intel wasn't able to play videos decently; only blocky and badly rendered pictures of something moving on the screen. Period.And no, unless the Atoms are on the ION platform, they can't play any video in more than SD format. Let alone apply filters for re-size.And to directly answer your question. Core2 Duos on laptops were not able to play videos decently and nothing before that was able to, where any iGPU from nVidia or AMD was able to prior to the C2D's in notebooks. I'm pretty sure in desktop was not that much different.Cheers!


    My GMA 950 IGP of my 2GHz Pentium-Dual Core computer (on-board IGP) from 2007 or so would disagree with you. It handles 720p excellently and 1080p well and even my Pentium 4 630 from my 2004 desktop can handle 1080p excellently once I gave it a Radeon 5450. It's CPU is only a 3GHz P4. My old Dell 2.4GHz P4 laptop with an Intel IGP (I'd have to check to make sure which one it is) can't handle 720p very well, but the CPU has not trouble with it, just the GPU. Heck, my Atom netbook (1.6GHz single core from around two years ago, I'd have to check the model to be sure of it's GPU and CPU model number) can play 480p just fine and 720p/1080p also don't tax the CPU much, just the GPU.

    My whole point is that weak CPUs have no trouble with video, only weak GPUs have trouble with video. You'd have to find an extremely slow CPU to be unable to watch video on it so long as the rest of the computer, such as the graphics, are good enough. Even low-end GPUs like my GMA 950 can handle video playback decently, so having a GPU should not be much of a problem except with extremely weak systems such as some Intel netbooks or a very old notebook/desktop without a decent video card.
  • wiyosaya
    bgaimurhttp://www.streamcomputing.eu/blog [...] nceptions/CUDA is a dying breed.

    Maybe so, howerver, nVidia is supporting openCL with 301.42 drivers. IMHO, having nVidia cards benchmarked would be of interest to those of us who own nVidia cards.
  • nebun
    bgaimurhttp://www.streamcomputing.eu/blog [...] nceptions/CUDA is a dying breed.

    that's why there are more CUDA apps out there....you are very wrong my friend....CUDA is and will be the better engine