Take the 2-minute tour ×
Geographic Information Systems Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for cartographers, geographers and GIS professionals. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I was searching the web for benchmarks (but couldn't find any) that would indicate hardware performance (probably cpu in particular) in different GIS software in time consuming tasks (like hillshade generation, raster reproject, topology buildup), not for the purpose of comparing different GIS software but to compare performance for different cpus, multithreading impact, ssd, etc. If i started with that, I suppose i'd need a standarized set of data, publicly available so anyone could try and post results. But does anyone know if such comparisons already exist anywhere?

share|improve this question
1  
Not necessarily a benchmark, but some suggestions for hardware. –  Roy Oct 23 '12 at 13:13

3 Answers 3

up vote 2 down vote accepted

I know that in the past our organization has made a custom suite to benchmark different hardware setups for GIS, so I would assume that (back then, at least) there was nothing that fit the bill for comparison.

As SP11 mentions, you should be specific as to what you want to compare. I would assume it is likely just a small number of different hardware configurations. In that case, just adding some benchmark logging to a set of standard sample tasks would probably give you enough information to make a good decision.

And then, once you've done that, you can post the results on the web for everyone!

share|improve this answer
    
Indeed, i am thinking of making a small website with some public datasets anyone can download, description of testing methods, so anyone could be able to do it on their own machine then add their own results. –  U2ros Oct 23 '12 at 16:05

At FOSS4G they perform a Benchmark test every year against various WMS Servers. Being in the Open Source spirit, they use free datasets, document everything, and release the source code so you can probably pick what you want from it.

You can find out a little more from the wiki page: http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Benchmark

Unfortunately it looks to be a poorly maintained wiki and many pages don't like to other relevant pages so you'll have to search a bit to find everything (its scattered around). http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Category:Benchmarking might be a good place to start.

They also have results where they discuss things like what was limiting stuff, including hardware, i.e. from slashgeo

This year, benchmark includes bottlenecks from CPU, disk access, network access and remote database access.

share|improve this answer
    
I have seen these yes, they certainly do cover the map serving aspect of gis very thoroughly, but a bit out of date –  U2ros Oct 23 '12 at 16:03
    
@U2ros - They do have 2012 ones too. The wiki page is a little sparse on that (wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Benchmarking_2012), but it does link to a mailing list where you could ask specific questions of them. –  GIS-Jonathan Oct 24 '12 at 9:13

Actually its very good question..I think its related to load balancing of various GIS tasks..

You can not compare any GIS software based on performance..the every GIS software consists various different component which depend on OS,hardware and many other parameter..

For ex. let say image processing ..you can compare this task in GRASS and ERDAS (lot of difference you can fine..depend on algorithm,coding and other parameters)

Please be specific why you want to compare (Is there any specific functionality that you want to compare??)

Please let us know so that their should be perfect ans. will be applicable..

Functionality matrix or white paper may be suitable for you regarding your query..

I hope above points will give you the direction..

Thanks..

share|improve this answer
    
S/He doesn't want to compare the software, but instead use the software to compare hardware. –  GIS-Jonathan Oct 23 '12 at 14:03
1  
What is your source? –  Aaron Oct 23 '12 at 14:19
    
Exactly, use software to compare hardware. For example, i was just buying new workstation last week. And i have to say, most benchmarks are games or video oriented. After some mingling i decided to go for a Xeon E3-1240-v2, which is an entry level ws/server cpu. I ll be using it to do some rendering and raster transformations, but if i just read the 'ordinary' benchmarks, i would probably end up with an i5 3570 or i7 3770 which both cost MORE and give less in the field of GIS –  U2ros Oct 23 '12 at 16:01

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.