DSPRelated.com
Forums

TI DM642 DSP vs. Pentium

Started by Lisa November 6, 2003
Hi all, I am new to the group, and would like to ask a question.
I assume you all are familar with TI's new DSP, the "digital media"
DM642. It is a member of the new C64x series DSPs, with clock speeds
up to 720MHz.

My question is, how do you think this DSP will compare in machine
vision image processing applications to a "typical" desktop PC in the
2 to 3 GHz range.

I know I can't just compare clock speeds, and a lot depends on how
well the software is written, but in general, would this DSP be
slightly slower, about the same, or slightly faster (or something
else) ignoring any IO and memory bottlenecks.

Thanks




Lisa-

> Hi all, I am new to the group, and would like to ask a question.
> I assume you all are familar with TI's new DSP, the "digital media"
> DM642. It is a member of the new C64x series DSPs, with clock speeds
> up to 720MHz.
>
> My question is, how do you think this DSP will compare in machine
> vision image processing applications to a "typical" desktop PC in the
> 2 to 3 GHz range.
>
> I know I can't just compare clock speeds, and a lot depends on how
> well the software is written, but in general, would this DSP be
> slightly slower, about the same, or slightly faster (or something
> else) ignoring any IO and memory bottlenecks.

To ignore I/O and memory bottlenecks makes the issue purely "benchmark". You
should
be able to compare some benchmarks for typical algorithms published by Intel and
TI
and get some idea.

But the real question is "what can you build". Issues of chip size, power
consumption, I/O interfaces and throughput are critical. In our product line,
the
huge heatsink and fan make a 2.4 GHz Pentium impossible.

Jeff Brower
system engineer
Signalogic


Lisa-

> True, but what I am trying to get a handle on is that
> TI is big on their "BDTI benchmark" number, and claim
> that you have to compare apples to apples, and that
> even thought the DSP does not run as fast, it is
> better suited for this stuff than a multipurpose
> processor that runs faster.
>
> Your point about the heatsink is a good one for
> example, where the Pentium would melt down without
> one, the DSP is only a couple watts.

I suggest to find TI and Intel benchmarks for something like 1024 x 1024 2D FFT
for a
16-bit/pixel image, and convert numbers given in cycles into time using the
maximum
clock speeds. A usable 2D FFT would require the processor to access offchip
memory
(SDRAM or DRAM) which I think is very fair -- I would not use a TI benchmark
where
all data can be stored in onchip SRAM.

I think the group would be very interested in what you can find.

-Jeff

P.S. I posted to the C6x group also, where there is often discussion about DSP +
image/video. > --- Jeff Brower <> wrote:
> > Lisa-
> >
> > > Hi all, I am new to the group, and would like to
> > ask a question.
> > > I assume you all are familar with TI's new DSP,
> > the "digital media"
> > > DM642. It is a member of the new C64x series DSPs,
> > with clock speeds
> > > up to 720MHz.
> > >
> > > My question is, how do you think this DSP will
> > compare in machine
> > > vision image processing applications to a
> > "typical" desktop PC in the
> > > 2 to 3 GHz range.
> > >
> > > I know I can't just compare clock speeds, and a
> > lot depends on how
> > > well the software is written, but in general,
> > would this DSP be
> > > slightly slower, about the same, or slightly
> > faster (or something
> > > else) ignoring any IO and memory bottlenecks.
> >
> > To ignore I/O and memory bottlenecks makes the issue
> > purely "benchmark". You should
> > be able to compare some benchmarks for typical
> > algorithms published by Intel and TI
> > and get some idea.
> >
> > But the real question is "what can you build".
> > Issues of chip size, power
> > consumption, I/O interfaces and throughput are
> > critical. In our product line, the
> > huge heatsink and fan make a 2.4 GHz Pentium
> > impossible.
> >
> > Jeff Brower
> > system engineer
> > Signalogic