Jump to content

alternative to labview fft


Recommended Posts

I'm trying to use the labview FFT however it's extremely slow compared to FFTW... I have wrapped the fftw in lv however it's rather inconsistent with regards to the time it takes to calculate. In plain c it's not inconsistent at all so I suppose the issue has something to do with the way the memory is allocated when I use it in lv. Any ideas how to solve this?

Link to comment

I would recommend trying the NI Multicore Analysis and Sparse Matrix Toolkit. The FFT included there seems robust and much faster than the native LabVIEW FFT. It also supports single precision (which is faster again, and usually sufficient) and 3D FFTs as well. All of the MASM VIs are useful replacements for the single-threaded defaults, and I think it is based on the Intel Math Kernel Library. I think I tried FFTW at one stage - in fact I just found a post I made in 2013 which has links to a FFTW wrapper - I'd forgotten about that!  Also at the end of the page is a link to a 32/64 bit version. But I'd still try the MASM toolkit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
On 5/24/2023 at 2:13 PM, GregSands said:

I would recommend trying the NI Multicore Analysis and Sparse Matrix Toolkit. The FFT included there seems robust and much faster than the native LabVIEW FFT. It also supports single precision (which is faster again, and usually sufficient) and 3D FFTs as well. All of the MASM VIs are useful replacements for the single-threaded defaults, and I think it is based on the Intel Math Kernel Library. I think I tried FFTW at one stage - in fact I just found a post I made in 2013 which has links to a FFTW wrapper - I'd forgotten about that!  Also at the end of the page is a link to a 32/64 bit version. But I'd still try the MASM toolkit.

Interesting suggestion. Any idea how the multicore option works (Get/Set Number of Threads)?

When I test this on a standalone VI, I get a number of 8 for "Transform" (which is what I am interested in testing) or "Linear Algebra" (I am using a 8 cores/16 threads  laptop).

When I include this as part of a larger project (launching a number of parallel tasks some of which use parallel loops), I end up with a "1" (in both tasks). I am not sure I should necessarily expect multithreading to be particularly useful in my case (rather small array sizes) but there isn't any explanation that I know of as to how this is supposed to work or be understood...

  • Like 1
Link to comment

Aside from what is in the Help, I don't know how the Threads option works. From what I can tell, it does not seem to have much (any?) effect inside a parallel loop. I tend to use it for large 3D arrays, so it makes a substantial difference.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.