[vorbis] Why is ogg123 so much slower than XMMS?

[Joel]

> > I belive cpu-time isn't always reported correctly for xmms and its
> treads,
> > (at least when using top to
> > report). I didn't notice any change in %-of cpu-time between
> xmms(stopped)
> > or xmms(playing). Is this true
> > in your case too?
> 
> When stopped there are four threads of XMMS, none is taking CPU time.
> When playing two more are created, and totally they eat 0.3~0.5% on my
> PII/233 (isn't noticeable, is it? :)

That's why I suspect something is left out. I know from experience that a P75 _barely_ handles mp3 decoding (choppy sound). Suppose decoding took 2% of your CPU-time, then (with some mathematic approximation) it should be sufficent with a PII running at 0.02*233= 4.66MHz! Im my eyes, this is most unrealistic.
 
> From a look at /proc I find that the player threads eat 0.02s of user
> time and 0.2s of kernel time per minute of playing, so it is truly
> 0.3%.  Therefore, if the time calculated is wrong, it is kernel's
> fault.

That seems to be the case, (Will we ever find a reliable kernel, anyways? ;-) unless the guys hacking xmms have found some miracle way of playing mp3's

I think other mp3-players (like madplay or mpg123) will yield values more 'in leage' with ogg123. I'll test it someday when I get my hands om my linux computer again.

-Joel

--- >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 'vorbis-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.