Is running imagemagick really that intensive? Isn't running shaders intensive as... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		72deluxe on May 7, 2015 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: Racking Mac Pros Is running imagemagick really that intensive? Isn't running shaders intensive as it needs to be compiled on the fly and handed off to the GPU driver?

angersock on May 7, 2015 [–]

Switching between shaders is orders of magnitudes cheaper than spinning up and spinning down a process.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact