New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
CPU for Image Processing / PHP Imagick Extension
prev use E3-1240 v3 and after migrate website to E3-1230 server and cpu always 100% with high load up to 30s and iowait to 20-30%. not seem a lot difference in cpu, i think need new server. so E3 with powerfull single cpu or other cpu like E5 with a lots of cpu.
i do a lot images processing every second, basically only running webserver + php with imagick extension.
So its better to have a lots of cpu but less clockspeed or few cpu but more powerfull single cpu clockspeed.
Comments
budget?
7
A single CPU can only go so fast. If you can process images in parallel you should just get multiple CPUS. Also consider using a GPU for image processing (if the miners haven't bought them all).
Have you checked the memory and disk (IOPS) usage when processing?
Using php to run imagemagick processing via imagick php extension is probably why. If you can, use imagemagick directly bypassing imagick php extension usage entirely
Try a different stack, like nodejs: https://github.com/lovell/sharp
From my point of view, it is more efficient to use c++ or any other compilable language for image processing than php.
im not post it on "request" section, already got list providers in mind.
nah im not processing using multi threading, cause im use looping in single post. so if im using looping is wise using E3 cpu than E5?
will check IOPS after this. thanks
is that make a different, im working with framework and using this https://github.com/Intervention/image and i dont know how to integrate it. my focus currently just upgrade server and decide which cpu. thanks for suggestion
i dont use js framework before just php framework, but in future i'll try node.js or reactjs for sure.
i use it for website, i dont think that possible without some "works".
Update: after a day check many reference imagick work ideal min at @ 3.33Ghz+ clockspeed. i should move to new server then, thanks community for helpful suggestion.
Depending on how much images you process, it might be efficient to divide the workload into multiple threads.