-
Example of Single Audio Stream take 7.769s
but speed is slow compared with the example of "Full Audio" (take 2.879s) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 4 comments
-
Can you quantify "slow"? When you just process the whole audio, you obviously assume that you have this audio on disk on in memory (or wherever). When you do streaming, you pretend to "listen" the audio one chunk at a time like in real-life when you listen to someone. If the speed is not enough for your applications, try a We also did some research on model speed, when you mimic streaming it takes:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
This is roughly in line with our single thread benchmarks (since this file is 60 seconds long), assuming you use num_steps=8 (also maybe some initial warm-up time) We have decided not to publish the GPU version (because it has very little production use), but if your target is processing files on disk, you can run 10 1-thread processes in parallel and you will get 300-400 RTS, which is ample |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
how to try 10k model |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
https://github.com/snakers4/silero-vad#getting-started
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Can you quantify "slow"?
When you just process the whole audio, you obviously assume that you have this audio on disk on in memory (or wherever).
Therefore you get tremendous boosts from batching. If you process files on disk - there is no point in streaming in case of PyTorch NNs.
When you do streaming, you pretend to "listen" the audio one chunk at a time like in real-life when you listen to someone.
Anyway it ends up working much more fast than real-time because in the example the python iterator does not really "wait" for audio to play, but processing audio one chunk at a time is obviously slower than just batching several chunks together.
If the speed is not enough for your applicati…