Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
|
Re: alternative to conv command
Posted:
Apr 29, 2011 5:27 PM
|
|
Hi,
thanks for your reply. your filter length is 3 whereas mine is 2048. I think thats the problem.
ImageAnalyst <imageanalyst@mailinator.com> wrote in message <8261b8bb-1abe-415f-ba09-0acc595aaa00@z13g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>...
> On Apr 29, 3:08 pm, "Balachander Narasimhan"
> <balxxxxxch...@whatever.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > thanks for the reply. I am quite sure it is conv command. I step through the code and it takes 1min and 14s for a sequence of length 2048e3 in a 1.2 GHz cpu. Do you think this is resonable?
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Here's what I get when running it several times on this not-
> particularly-large array:
> data = rand(1,2048000);
> tic
> smoothedData = conv(data, ones(3,1)/3);
> toc
>
>
> Elapsed time is 0.044840 seconds.
> Elapsed time is 0.054861 seconds.
> Elapsed time is 0.048844 seconds.
> Elapsed time is 0.046158 seconds.
> or about 2000 times faster than what you're getting. What exactly are
> you doing such it it's so slow?
> Elapsed time is 0.063725 seconds.
> Elapsed time is 0.048575 seconds.
> Elapsed time is 0.042594 seconds.
|
|
|
|
