where did you get these numbers? If you really want to compare the latency of actual interconnects you should use the official performance results achieved in real environments using the driver api: (values from homepages)
1. SCI (dolphinIcs) : 1.4 us 2. Quadrics: 1.7 us 3. Infiniband 4.5 us 4. Myrinet 6.3 us
MPI latency and bandwidth highly depend on the mpi library. I suggest to compare the mpich results. I rated these interconnects. But I'm sorry, I only have a german version.
Photographers work with RAW because it is lossless and can be recorded with 16 or 12 bits of data per pixel, where JPEG and TIFFS tend to be 8 bits per pixel.
I don't really understand why everybody wants a lossless format to be without compression. JPEG and quality set to 100% is also lossless for 8 bit source images.
Support for >8 bit quantization is a good point, but if it really matters why isn't JPEG2000 much more common?
Slashdot Mirror
Hi,
e cts_docu.pdf
where did you get these numbers?
If you really want to compare the latency of actual interconnects you should use the official performance results achieved in real environments using the driver api:
(values from homepages)
1. SCI (dolphinIcs) : 1.4 us
2. Quadrics: 1.7 us
3. Infiniband 4.5 us
4. Myrinet 6.3 us
MPI latency and bandwidth highly depend on the mpi library. I suggest to compare the mpich results.
I rated these interconnects. But I'm sorry, I only have a german version.
http://stef.tvk.rwth-aachen.de/research/interconn
Support for >8 bit quantization is a good point, but if it really matters why isn't JPEG2000 much more common?
Stefan