[tremor] Tremor on x86 vs ARM, performance highlights: CPU use 120x different

[slothead]

Dilb:

Done.  Same changes made (I build using a cpp compiler; please remove the "scale" var or use
it! --haha, if only it were just that).  Guess what?  Your 0906 setup uses exactly the same CPU for
the SA, at 33% (the x86 is already smokin' without any help at all).  EXE file size did grow,
though, by 120 KB.  Oh, right, I didn't use your ASM file, sorry (it was the point, mostly, right?),
but like you say

> I doubt my assembly version could by itself improve so much the CPU load :),

Mostly compiler generated anyway, right?

Now, when you write in your .S that there's a 5% improvement, tops, you mean 5% of what's already
going on, and not 5% for your particular setup, relative 100% CPU use?  I mean, if it take 100
seconds now, you estimate with the .S in place it runs in 95 seconds.  Right?   So, given that, the
best I could see here is about 2%, down to 31%.  You get 18%, huh?

>file link

Already had it sitting in my in files box.

>I still don't know what quality settings you used (-q5 ?) to create your
>vorbis files.

Varies.  I use -q2 to -q6.   For -q2 it's 33%.  For -q10 it goes up by about 10% (say 43% instead of
33%).  This is 451 kbps.  Same .wav encoded at -q5 (158kbps) is about 2% more (35% CPU) than -q2 (90
kbps) at 33% CPU.  Something like that, arm 200 mhz.  Got -q3 sitting there..it's about 34%.  FWIW,
the 41*.ogg from xiph.org is  31% CPU (69 kpbs).

What CPU % use do you get on your strongarm WITHOUT your assembly code patch?

--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'tremor-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.