CloudCompare forum

Dimitri wrote:Daniel: maybe we could post a reference "large" point cloud (200 millions points) in .bin format so that users could post their FPS and associated hardware configuration ?

I actually started working on this several months ago but got distracted and never got around to publishing it. Seeing the comments today motivated me to get something out there. By no means is this benchmarking methodology very scientific but it would be interesting to start qualitatively comparing various hardware setups.

Here is a link to a form where you can enter your own results:

http://goo.gl/forms/IiC8yuunx9

And here are the results for a couple of machines I happen to have in front of me today:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

The benchmark is based on the gargage.e57 sample data file, which is about 27 million points or about 550 MB so it should fit easily into VRAM on any reasonably modern GPU, however, if you want to watch performance fall off a cliff you could easily dupe it a few times as you suggested. Rather than simply rank based on framerate maybe I could add some sort of framerate per displayed points ratio.

Great ! Thanks a lot Jed, that's perfect, and this is going to be super useful.

That's great indeed. I'll try to add a link to this survey in the next "release" newsletter.

P.S.: I tried to perform the 'garage' test yesterday but my hard drive died when I started my computer! I'll try again later ;)

Hi,

I've finally been able to run the test with the GTX970, and it seems to be the best bang for the buck right now for CC. I bought an MSI GTX470 4GD5 OC (350 €) that is very silent and fits even small Workstation cases (e.g. the latest DELL precision are not very large and will not accomodate large graphic cards). Base configuration is around 38 fps, and you have a very simple utility to overclock the card: without pushing things too hard, I was able to easily reach 47 fps.
This card can easily be bridged for SLI operation.

Made the test on my computer too, I just apparently made a mistake and can't edit it: I got 8.336 FPS, not 8336 (of course).

Haowyr wrote:Made the test on my computer too, I just apparently made a mistake and can't edit it: I got 8.336 FPS, not 8336 (of course).

Fixed it for you.