[FFmpeg-devel] ALT_BITSTREAM_READER vs. A32 on ARMv4

[Mike .]

> To: ffmpeg-devel at mplayerhq.hu
> From: mans at mansr.com
> Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:57:10 +0000
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] ALT_BITSTREAM_READER vs. A32 on ARMv4
> 
> "Mike ." <giac2000 at hotmail.com> writes:
> 
> >> To: ffmpeg-devel at mplayerhq.hu
> >> From: mans at mansr.com
> >> Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 11:10:17 +0000
> >> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] ALT_BITSTREAM_READER vs. A32 on ARMv4
> >> 
> >> "Mike ." <giac2000 at hotmail.com> writes:
> >> 
> >> >> To: ffmpeg-devel at mplayerhq.hu
> >> >> From: mans at mansr.com
> >> >> Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2008 23:57:55 +0000
> >> >> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] ALT_BITSTREAM_READER vs. A32 on ARMv4
> >> >> 
> >> >> "Mike ." <giac2000 at hotmail.com> writes:
> >> >> 
> >> >> > Hi.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I'm decoding wma on ARMv4 using the ALT_BITSTREAM_READER.  The list
> >> >> > indicates that the A32_BITSTREAM_READER should be faster, however in
> >> >> > my testing its actually a bit slower.  Is there anything I'm missing
> >> >> > (I simply forced the definition in bitstream.h to one or the other and
> >> >> > benchmarked)?  Perhaps this is normal for ARM7TDMI?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Also, whats different about the two readers?  I've started digging
> >> >> > through them but I'm not really sure why they do things differently.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Using 32-bit aligned loads is often faster than several smaller loads
> >> >> on architectures that do not support unaligned accesses.  Sometimes
> >> >> extra processing overhead required to take advantage of this kills the
> >> >> improvement.  The bitstream readers are unfortunately rather sensitive
> >> >> to specifics of the CPU, so benchmarks are usually the only accurate
> >> >> way to tell which is faster.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Please try all three bitstream readers and report your results.
> >> >> 
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for the advice.
> >> >
> >> > My results (percent real time for a 192k WMAv2 track):
> >> >
> >> > LIBMPEG2_BITSTREAM_READER: 257.3%
> >> >
> >> > ALT_BITSTREAM_READER: 257.9% 
> >> >
> >> > A32_BITSTREAM_READER: 249.4%
> >> 
> >> This looks like A32_BITSTREAM_READER is the fastest on your CPU, or am
> >> I misinterpreting your numbers?
> >
> > 100% is real time, so having higher percentages means its decoding faster.
> 
> Could you give numbers as absolute (user) time for the decode instead?
> That is less confusing.

The track is 2:56 minutes long, so just multiply if you want absolute time. 

> If you also could test some other codecs, that would be great.

Unfortunately I have no way to run ffmpeg itself, and WMA is the only codec I've ported from ffmpeg.

Mike

_________________________________________________________________
It?s the same Hotmail?. If by ?same? you mean up to 70% faster.
http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_broad1_122008