Test of stitching speed of panoramas MS ICE vs Autopano Giga 2.0.3 and Hugin 0.7.0

A small test comparing the speed of stitching panoramas in the just released new version (wrote about it here ) Microsoft Image Composite Editor 1.3.3 ( download ). Compare with two popular stitches - Hugin and Autopano Giga . Tests - 50 MPix panorama (10 frames) and 81 MPix panorama (18 frames).



Iron: CPU Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 3.16 GHz, RAM 4 Gb, OS Windows XP Professional x86 SP3, ATI Radeon HD 4850 512 Mb.

Example 1
')
10 frames 2592 x 3888, panorama 12200 x 4300 (50 MPix).

Program	preview	render	Total	differences from default settings
Autopano Giga 2.0.3	0:08	Half past three	3:38	cache 512 mb memory use: high
Autopano Giga 2.0.3	0:08	Two to four	4.06	memory use: high
Autopano Giga 2.0.3	0:08	4:05	4:13
Hugin 0.7.0	1:33	1:43	3:16
ICE 1.3.3	0:13	0:29	0:42

From this test, it turned out that with the default settings, the Autopano Giga does not work in the most efficient way. In the next test I use adjustments in the parameters that led to the best test in the first test.

Example 2

18 frames 2592 x 3888, panorama 13500 x 6300 (81 MPix).

Program	preview	render	Total	differences from default settings
Autopano Giga 2.0.3	0:14	11:21	11:35	cache 512 mb memory use: high
Hugin 0.7.0	2:43	2:41	5:24
ICE 1.3.3	0:21	0:57	1:18

Conclusion

ICE offers a significant gain in stitching speed compared to Autopano Giga and Hugin. Acceleration relative to Hugin is 4.6x (10 frames) and 4.1x (18 frames), relative to Autopano Giga increases with the complexity of the panorama - 5.1x (10 frames) and 8.9x (18 frames).

PS

I wanted to check the ICE mode for stitching gigisktelnyh structured panoramas, but unfortunately this mode stably falls at least in Windows XP. The problem is reproduced by the developers (see the ICE forum ) and I hope that a corrected version will be released soon.