<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="bbPress/1.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>k-Wave User Forum &#187; Topic: GPU performence</title>
		<link>http://www.k-wave.org/forum/topic/gpu-performence</link>
		<description>Support for the k-Wave MATLAB toolbox</description>
		<language>en-US</language>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2026 22:00:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<generator>http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2</generator>
		<textInput>
			<title><![CDATA[Search]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[Search all topics from these forums.]]></description>
			<name>q</name>
			<link>http://www.k-wave.org/forum/search.php</link>
		</textInput>
		<atom:link href="http://www.k-wave.org/forum/rss/topic/gpu-performence" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

		<item>
			<title>Bradley Treeby on "GPU performence"</title>
			<link>http://www.k-wave.org/forum/topic/gpu-performence#post-78</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 2010 14:24:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Bradley Treeby</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">78@http://www.k-wave.org/forum/</guid>
			<description>&#60;p&#62;Hi Tomasz,&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;The speed-up you observe when running k-Wave on the GPU will depend on two things:&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;&#60;strong&#62;(1) The specifications of the GPU.&#60;/strong&#62; Notebook GPUs in particular tend to have only a small number of cores (48 in your case) with a relatively low clock speed and often only modest amounts of memory. This will reduce the achievable performance. &#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;&#60;strong&#62;(2) The size of the simulation grid.&#60;/strong&#62; Because of the additional computational overhead associated with setting up the computation on the GPU, you will likely only see performance increases when using larger grid sizes.&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;For some published benchmarking comparisons, see Fig. 7 in &#60;a href=&#34;http://www.k-wave.org/papers/2010-Treeby-JBO.pdf&#34;&#62;k-Wave: MATLAB toolbox for the simulation and reconstruction of photoacoustic wave-fields&#60;/a&#62;. In this example, using the GPU only becomes faster when the grid size reaches 2^18 elements. You could try increasing the size of the grid in the example you are running to see if you observe any speed-up as the grid size increases.&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;We are currently working on collating performance comparisons using a much bigger range of PCs and GPUs. I haven't had much experience with notebook GPUs so I would definitely be interested in hearing how you get on.&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;Brad.
&#60;/p&#62;</description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Tomluk on "GPU performence"</title>
			<link>http://www.k-wave.org/forum/topic/gpu-performence#post-77</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 2010 13:13:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Tomluk</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">77@http://www.k-wave.org/forum/</guid>
			<description>&#60;p&#62;Hi.&#60;br /&#62;
Did you do some tests on how much faster the simulations should work?&#60;br /&#62;
I used one of yours example (example_us_snells_law.m) for tests. When using GPUmat, calculations were much slower. It took 19 seconds for normal calculations, and 33 sec. using GPUmat. So my question is: is it my computer (specification below) or maybe something wrong with the script or is it a GPUmat problem?&#60;br /&#62;
I am using notebook with Windows 7 32bit, Intel I5-M430 2.27Ghz, nvidia 330M 1GB, 3GB RAM, Matlab 2010a.&#60;br /&#62;
Regards&#60;br /&#62;
Tomasz
&#60;/p&#62;</description>
		</item>

	</channel>
</rss>
