Forum

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - RHenriques

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16
1
General / Re: Mac M3 chip
« on: Today at 03:29:07 PM »
Hi Pierre

From my tests, while the machines were connected, the performance was more or less similar. The PC was similar while generating Depth Maps and, sometimes, seemed to be quicker. However, the M3Max seems to never stop while the PC seemed to freeze processing once in a while, probably related with information transfer among components. This gave an edge to the M3Max because, in the end, the processing was faster in the M3max overall, sometimes by more than 15 to 20% of the time. However, using the machine only in Battery power, there's no match for the M3Max. The processing in this machine is similar while connected or not connected to wall power. The PC was a lllloooooottttttt slower in battery power. I guess that both CPU and GPU uses a lot of throttling techniques to spare battery power at the expense of processing power. In this case (using battery power) I guess that there is no Laptop in the market today that can match the M3Max and the 3nm circuit technology (very thermal efficient).
Be aware that, despite lots os benchmarks that you can find in the internet, the benchmarks that matter are the ones we use in our workflow. Considering this, I went for the M3Max and, for now, the choice seemed to be correct. A matte acquired an M3Pro and the processing times in Metashape are a lot slower, more or less 30 to 40% the times we can observe in the M3Max. For this reason, if you choose a Mac for this purpose, the M3Max is the way to go for now. If you see in the internet, the percentages of lots of benchmarks between M3Max and M3pro do not reflect this difference and lead people to think that they have almost similar benchmarks.
Cheers

2
General / Re: Mac M3 chip
« on: May 17, 2024, 04:38:09 PM »
I've Just bought an M3Max portable (40 GPU cores version) and the performance it's incredible.
You get the same performance, no matter you are using the machine connected or in battery power.
It beats easily a Laptop PC with an Nvidia RTX 4090 (by a wide margin). I guess that the reason is the Apple integrated a lot better al the components without bandwidth constraints between them. The PC seems to stop a few times while the processing in the M3Max is constantly happening. In Point Cloud generation, for instance, things are more or less on pair between Nvidia 4090 and the M3Max (with a slight advantage in the max) while generating depth maps. However, when the processor is required for the second step, the M3Max beats the PC processor by a wide margin, speeding up all the processing time.
So far I'm amazed at the performance of this new apple machine. I honestly didn't expect it to be so fast. I think that if Agisoft improves a few steps and optimizes the processing for MacosX and this hardware, things could get even better.
You can, of course, get better processing times in a powerful desktop machine with several GPU's. However, considering that this is a portable machine, it's impressive. And, even better, the machine stays cool and fans barely startup.
I have 128 GB of Ram.
What Bzuco said about double performance on a PC may not be correct but my own experience, testing two top machines (Mac and PC), but, as he said, your wallet will cry with added Ram.
Cheers

The PC used to compare was a ASUS ROG Strix SCAR with 32GB of RAM and a Geforce RTX 4090 and a Ryzen 9 7945HX3D CPU, with a price around $3700

3
Hello Eden

Considering the principle behind photogrammetric matching, it's impossible to obtain any good result with water surfaces (which moves and have reflections) or any other moving or reflective surface. Unless there the water is very very shallow (20 cm or less), perfectly transparent, and you have distinctive features bellow the water, you won't be able to get any matching. The only way to obtain good altimetric results bellow water is to use sonar scanning (the needed equipment depends on your needs and environmental characteristics) or by using LIDAR that supports bathymetric features (usually until 2 Secchi depth).
If you are low on budget it will be a problem because a LIDAR with these features usually costs 75000 US D or a lot more. 
Cheers

4
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 2.0.0 pre-release
« on: December 28, 2022, 08:44:43 PM »
Pre-release build updated, so the activation issues on macOS should be resolved now.

Hi Alexey

Confirmed! Everything is working as expected now.
Best Regards

5
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 2.0.0 pre-release
« on: December 27, 2022, 09:15:21 PM »
Hello Renato,

Can you please specify the error message that you are observing during the activation?

Hi Alexey

After opening this latest beta, the message in attachment appears. After entering the serial number or activate via terminal, the result is the same, even if "Activation successful" message appears in the terminal. After, the second message in attachment appears (asking to contact your support).
Best regards


PS: Reinstalled previous last beta (15522) and it's working fine, without asking for the license.

6
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 2.0.0 pre-release
« on: December 27, 2022, 02:24:36 AM »
This last beta does not assume the previous version 2.0 license. If we reenter the serial number it gives an error.
Is there a workaround?
Best regards

7
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 2.0.0 pre-release
« on: December 15, 2022, 09:10:56 PM »
Thank you Alexey for the details.
As a matter of fact, in further tests, this last version works better than version 1.8.4, particularly in bigger projects. Processing times in version 2 are now slightly better that they were in version 1.8.4 consistently.
Great work!
Best regards



8
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 2.0.0 pre-release
« on: December 14, 2022, 08:37:44 PM »
we have floating licenses and seems they did NOT work with pre-release version.
Hello Renato,

Thank you for additional information.

We will try to prepare the test version for you and spader this week, that you should be able to test on MacOS configuration, hopefully the reported slow down issue would be resolved in that version and, if so, it will be also fixed in the next public pre-release update.

Hi Alexey

Just tested the version you sent (15512) and it's great!! The processing is more or less on pair with the 1.8.4 version. Probably 8 to 10% slower but much faster than the last beta. The problem seems to be solved. I'll test with all the external GPU's also but, probably, the problem is also gone with that setup. If something will go wrong I'll let you know.

By curiosity, and if it is possible to know, what was the problem?
Best regards

PS: All seems to be fine with the external GPU's. Now the processing times are on pair with version 1.8.4. All solved!!


9
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 2.0.0 pre-release
« on: December 13, 2022, 07:55:50 PM »
Hi Alexey

If the diference between 1.8.4 and 2 versions was about 10% processing time it would be great, considering the great new aditions of version 2.
However my processing times are a lot worst than that.
As you suggest, I'm sending the processing logs from the two versions using 2 processing requests in a row. In both cases, as you will see, processing times were worst in the second time. Considering this, probably the "compiling kernels" step is not the culprit. Things seems to slow a lot after this step.
See logs attached.
Best regards


10
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 2.0.0 pre-release
« on: December 13, 2022, 03:13:05 AM »
Hello

Version 2.0.0 build 15501 continues to have the problems previously noted in MacOS.
Processing times seem to be slower than last beta. Is there any tweak or improvment that can be done from my side?
In its present state, this version is almost unusable to obtain Point Clouds using macOS. Please try to compare the code with 1.8.4 because this version is working great in this step.

Using only a MacBookPro 16" intel and the included AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, using the same dataset, the build point cloud times are:

Metashape version 1.8.4 - 98.99 sec
Metashape version 2 - 644.256 sec

Best regards


11
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 2.0.0 pre-release
« on: December 09, 2022, 12:20:34 AM »
Hello

Version 2.0.0 build 15461 continues to have the problems previously noted in MacOS.
Using only a MacBookPro 16" intel and the included AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, using the same dataset, the build point cloud times are:

Metashape version 1.8.4 - 98.99 sec
Metashape version 2 - 607.864 sec

Best regards




12
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 2.0.0 pre-release
« on: November 28, 2022, 07:40:54 PM »
Hi Alexey

It is slower in any situation. With the internal AMD it's less noticeable because, with any eGPU, only the internal GPU seems to be used often but, however, it's a lot slower than version 1.8.4. The external eGPU's have very small periods of usage. With only one, two or three eGPU's, with or without the internal AMD active, things are slower after 8% of the ongoing task. The problem seems to be in the kernels building and loading step. Try to see what's the diference in code between the 1.8.4 and 2 version, in this step, because 1.8.4 it's working just fine.
Cheers

13
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 2.0.0 pre-release
« on: November 28, 2022, 05:06:21 PM »
Metashape 2.0 vs 15412 is still too slow with eGPU AMD's and MacOS.
With the same set, hardware and parameters, Metashape 1.8.4 takes a little more than 2 minutes to process what takes 50 minutes (!!!!) to process in Metashape 2.0.
Logs attached.
Cheers


 

14
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 2.0.0 pre-release
« on: November 22, 2022, 11:32:34 PM »
Version 15359 is also very slow. The same problem as before (see logs).
Cheers



15
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 2.0.0 pre-release
« on: November 17, 2022, 06:16:52 PM »
Latest 2.0 version, from 7th november, is still very slow (unusable) in MacOS with AMD's eGPU's. Kernel building and loading while building the Point Cloud does not pass 8% for a while and takes ages to reach 14%. Version 1.8.4 (current stable one) is fine.

Hello Renato,

Can you share the log from 2.0.0 for any GPU supported stage from starting the task up to the point when it gets slow?


Hello Alexey

I'm sending the logs from Vs2 and Vs 1.8.4 in exactly the same hardware conditions and with the same set and parameters.
I had to stop the processing of Vs 2 after 11% because it was not doing nothing. You will notice quickly that after OpenCL kernel building, things advance very slowly. Everything is ok with version 1.8.4.
Cheers


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16