You're right about the FPGAs and that's a last resort. Rigt now, the GTX460s are the cheapest, easiest, and probably fastest. On Saturday, March 26, 2011, Jesse Lackey wrote= : > Hi... > > V G wrote: >> differences between CPU processing and processing using FPGAs. I think I >> should be able to understand that and am prepared to tackle whatever >> learning curve there may be. Also, multiple desktops would most certainl= y >> not be cheaper than a couple of GTX460s or a big fat FPGA with multiple >> parallel processors. I think a video card would be the best solution for >> this and would make things go very very fast. > > I agree on the speed, but have you priced out a big fat FPGA development > kit? =A0We are not talking $200 spartan boards, and the development effor= t > to get you image data flowing thru them at many megabytes a second. =A0vs= .. > 3 desktops at $700 each? =A0I guess it depends what you think your time i= s > worth, or the availability of new lab equipment money vs. grad student > time "already paid for". > > At $200 each for the graphics cards - unclear if you can have more than > 2 in a single desktop, do they require 16 lanes of PCIe? - should you > find that your C++ app doesn't cut it by a factor of 10 then this would > be the next step. =A0If you get something working with CUDA, I'd like to > hear how it goes. > > Good luck! > J > -- > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .