Upgrading SDK from 4.2.3 to 4.2.5 leads to significant perf drop

Software
,
1

Hi,

Setup:

  • ZED X camera on Jetson
  • Jetpack 6.0 / Tegra 36.3.0
  • CUDA 12.2
  • Quad link drivers 1.2.1

Running ZED_Explorer on identical setup, clean L4T 36.3.0 container with:

A) SDK 4.2.3 → runs 1200 at 60Hz with 0 frame drops

sdk423
sdk4231920×1080 136 KB

B) SDK 4.2.5 → running 1080p at 30Hz only runs at 15Hz leading to significant frame drop

sdk425
sdk4251920×1080 141 KB

Similarly, when running with ROS2

ros2 launch zed_wrapper zed_camera.launch.py camera_model:=zed and running ros2 topic echo /diagnostics in another terminal session, the processing time doubles for 4.2.5

2

Please upgrade the ZED ROS2 Wrapper to the latest version in the master branch and upgrade the ZED X Driver to v1.2.2

3

Hi I have similar problem,

I am using AGX Orin DevKit with ZEDX Driver 1.2.2. (Btw thank you for the NVArgus denoising solution)

When using 4.2.3 there is no framde drop either with HD1080 or HD1200

4.2.3-HD1080
4.2.3-HD10802261×1326 624 KB

When using 4.2.5 the HD1200 is okay:

4.2.5-HD1200
4.2.5-HD12002261×1326 590 KB

but when HD1080 the frame drops drastically, basically 30 fps to 15hz and 60 to 30fps as it halves constantly:

30fps:

4.2.5-HD1080_
4.2.5-HD1080_2261×1326 624 KB

60fps:

4.2.5-1080-60fps
4.2.5-1080-60fps2261×1326 617 KB

It seems like a bug with the update :confused:

Thanks!

4

Extra note:

Also when I arrange the internal grab rate to 15 and publishing to 15, it drops to 7.5 fps. As there is a hidden " /2 " division somewehere

q: 7.50 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.73 Mbps (Avg: #93 - Freq: 7.50 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.74 Mbps (Avg: #94 - Freq: 7.50 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.76 Mbps (Avg: #95 - Freq: 7.50 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.73 Mbps (Avg: #96 - Freq: 7.50 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.71 Mbps (Avg: #97 - Freq: 7.50 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.77 Mbps (Avg: #98 - Freq: 7.50 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.73 Mbps (Avg: #99 - Freq: 7.49 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.68 Mbps (Avg: #100 - Freq: 7.53 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.95 Mbps (Avg:#101 - Freq: 7.46 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.48 Mbps (Avg:#102 - Freq: 7.52 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.86 Mbps (Avg:#103 - Freq: 7.49 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.70 Mbps (Avg:#104 - Freq: 7.51 Hz (Avg: 7.58 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.84 Mbps (Avg:#105 - Freq: 7.50 Hz (Avg: 7.57 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.74 Mbps (Avg:#106 - Freq: 7.46 Hz (Avg: 7.57 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.49 Mbps (Avg:#107 - Freq: 7.52 Hz (Avg: 7.57 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.85 Mbps (Avg:#108 - Freq: 7.49 Hz (Avg: 7.57 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.65 Mbps (Avg:#109 - Freq: 7.51 Hz (Avg: 7.57 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.78 Mbps (Avg:#110 - Freq: 7.49 Hz (Avg: 7.57 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.68 Mbps (Avg:#111 - Freq: 7.48 Hz (Avg: 7.57 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.63 Mbps (Avg:#112 - Freq: 7.48 Hz (Avg: 7.57 Hz) - Bandwidth: 52.62 Mbps (Avg:
5

The problem has been noted and the team is on it.

2 Likes
6

Any update on this issue, please?