DAQmx Read 1D WFM vs 2D DBL

[CTF]

Other than convenience of the format of the acquired data, are there any advantages (i.e. memory, speed, etc)  to using

DAQmx Read Analog 1D Wfm NChan NSamp

 -Or-

DAQmx Read Analog 2D DBL NChan NSamp

I'm doing a buffered continuous acquisition of multiple channels using a producer/consumer architecture. I'm not concerned about the absolute time information available in the waveform format; it's convenient but I can get what I need elsewhere.  In post processing the data format is a toss-up.  If I collect 1D Wfm data I end up stripping out the Y-data for some analysis, but end up building waveforms for other analysis if I collect a 2D DBL data.

-ctf

[vt92 · Accepted solution]

I did some quick benchmarking and it looks like the 1D WFM is slower and takes more memory than the 2D DBL.  The overall impact of these differences would depend on the size of your data blocks. 

[CTF]

Thanks.  That's what I expected.  The code generated from the DAQ assistant 1D WFM, but I'll stick with the 2D DBL format.  I douubt it'll make a noticeable difference with my data sets, but I'm more comfortable manipulating arrays.

-ctf