ESP3D
ESP3D copied to clipboard
luc-github
[BenchMark]Web upload / Web Download on different FS and platform
I think it would be very informative to bench the speed of upload / download a file using FTP / WebDav / Webserver to LocalFS / SD on ESP32 and ESP8266 using MCVE to be sure the comparaison is correct
| Target | Speed KB/S | Note |
|---|---|---|
| ESP32 + WEBSERVER + FAT | 56.01 | |
| ESP32 + WEBSERVER + LITTLEFS | 59.60 | |
| ESP8266 + WEBSERVER + LITTLEFS | ||
| ESP32 + WEBSERVER + SD native | 75.06 | |
| ESP8266 + WEBSERVER + SD native | ||
| ESP32 + WEBSERVER + SD Fat | 101.9 ~122.4 | SDFAT 2.1.2 |
| ESP8266 + WEBSERVER + SD Fat | ||
| ESP32 + WEBSERVER + SDIO | ||
| ESP8266 + WEBSERVER + SDIO | ||
| ESP32 + WEBDAV+ LITTLEFS | ||
| ESP8266 + WEBDAV+ LITTLEFS | ||
| ESP32 + WEBDAV+ SD native | ||
| ESP8266 + WEBDAV+ SD native | ||
| ESP32 + WEBDAV+ SD Fat | ||
| ESP8266 + WEBDAV+ SD Fat | ||
| ESP32 + WEBDAV+ SDIO | ||
| ESP8266 + WEBDAV+ SDIO | ||
| ESP32 + FTP+ LITTLEFS | ||
| ESP8266 + FTP+ LITTLEFS | ||
| ESP32 + FTP+ SD native | ||
| ESP8266 + FTP+ SD native | ||
| ESP32 + FTP+ SD Fat | ||
| ESP8266 + FTP+ SD Fat | ||
| ESP32 + FTP+ SDIO | ||
| ESP8266 + FTP+ SDIO |
Others FW:
| FW | Target | Speed KB/S | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| grblHAL | ESP32 + FatFS + SDCard + WebDAV | 300~350 | |
| grblHAL | iMXRT1062 (Teensy4) + FatFS + SDCard + WebDAV | 1127 | Ethernet |
| grblHAL | STM32F7xx + FatFS + SDCard + WebDAV | 350 | Ethernet |
Adding with PSRAM could also be a thing to check on ESP32
Once done need to compare with speed in ESP3D / ESP3DLib and GRBL_ESP32 to see what must be improved and how This is based on feedback ESP32 WebServer upload is very slow compare to ESP8266
Using any asyncwebserver / external webserver is not the current target so it is out of scope - the goal is to do a status of current situation to plan improvements / changes
this PR may solve the speed issue https://github.com/espressif/arduino-esp32/pull/4787 (not tested)
Just listing files with Native ESP32 SD is slow in core 1.X, but it 10 times slower or more with core 2.X when using SPI, so it is a must to use the SDFAT2 on ESP32 with SPI
SD Native Core 1.x
SD Native Core 2.x
SDFat2
I have added a simple bench check in FS file upload abd SD File Upload in ESP3DLib 3.0 - and tested ESP32
same test should be done on ESP3D to see if using core 0 instead of core 1 affect the perfomance
I will test other configurations when I have time
hi luc,I test esp32s2 with sdfat2.0 in spi mode .I find that the sector size of tf card can influence the speed of upload files.
A low speed card, 8g capacity, 2048ksec, Max speed 270ksec a high speed card, 16G capacity, 64ksec, Max speed 190KSEC, and I found that SDFAT2 does not support 32G cards
I did configuration with compatibility with 3Dprinter FW in mind, so 4G/8G is the target, 16G may be also supported, be sur you use https://www.sdcard.org/downloads/formatter/
and use Fat32 format I did tested 32G/64G/128G in past but long time I did not recheck the support, and definitly not with SDFat 2.x
Some grblHAL speeds with FatFS + SDCard + WebDAV, using WinSCP for testing:
- ESP32: 300-350KB/s up- and download speeds, this with my heavily modified lwIP http daemon (I have ditched the ESP32 http daemon).
- iMXRT1062 (Teensy4) 1.1MB/s upload, 3-3.5MB/s download (with ethernet).
- STM32F7xx: 300-350KB/s up- and download speeds. This is with a broken and slow low-level ethernet driver, there is a new available from ST and I will switch to this soon.
RP2040 (Pi Pico W) support for WebUI is on my todo list, will be interesting to see how this fares...
For information @pipi61 reported https://github.com/luc-github/ESP3D/issues/491#issuecomment-766157740 that esp32 + webdav + SDIO can reach 500KB/s
Additionnaly Reprap porting team, that added esp32 support to duetwifi, claim that they reach 1.2MB/s, but in case of Duet wifi, esp32 is only used as data bridge, the webserver is hosted by the main MCU, and I think the SD card is SDIO one, but communitation between ESP32 and MCU are SPI only - TBC as I never took time to dig in
But it shows that there is area of improvement 🐱