
Benchmark results comparing the AKTIVE and NETPBM readers
| Parent ↗ |
Summary
Comparable formats (binary), and modes (file, Tcl_Channel).
The AKTIVE reader is between 2 and 5 times slower than NETPBM, despite the recent boost.
- When using 8 threads, matching the number of CPU cores, the faktor is 4.
Format differences:
AKTIVE stores doubles, 8 bytes, per pixel.
- Versus NETPBM's single byte per pixel.
AKTIVE requires endian conversion (byte shuffling).
- Whereas NETPBM converts to double and scales.
Thus
- AKTIVE reads more, with simple processing.
- NETPBM reads much less, with more complex processing.