I think Roberts code should be included and implemented with a switch so
us "non-compilers" can test it.
Ross.
Roel VdB wrote:
Hello Robert,
Thursday, September 28, 2000, 8:12:59 PM, you wrote:
RH Dmitry schrieb am Don, 28 Sep 2000:
but what version i have to upload???
from project
Ross Levis schrieb am Fre, 29 Sep 2000:
I think Roberts code should be included and implemented with a switch so
us "non-compilers" can test it.
look at Dmitry's site, there it is for Windows users.
http://www.chat.ru/~dkutsanov/~index.htm
The latest alpha
hi -- This is my first post to the list. I've been
helping myself to the cvs source code for a few months now and this is a
subject I have done some experimentation with.
the only drawback I've found when using --nspsytune in vbr mode is that
the average bitrate may increase somewhat
Mark Powell schrieb am Don, 28 Sep 2000:
On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Robert Hegemann wrote:
At least your 3.87 MMX version seems to be compiled with the
Makefile.MSVC I checked in, with RH_AMP and RH_VALIDATE_MS
enabled. Dmitry, is that right?
BTW Robert, are you recommending these
Mark Powell schrieb am Don, 28 Sep 2000:
On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Robert Hegemann wrote:
On my Linux Box with a Pentium 166 MMX the MMX and non-MMX
version produce bit identical results.
How did you get the Linux version to assemble the MMX code? I've had no
luck with GNU as
Gabriel Bouvigne schrieb am Don, 28 Sep 2000:
At least your 3.87 MMX version seems to be compiled with the
Makefile.MSVC I checked in, with RH_AMP and RH_VALIDATE_MS
enabled. Dmitry, is that right?
Should they be considered as default switches? In this case, why aren't they
defined in
# of S frames/ total # of M/S frames]. Room enough on the lines :)
4) Why does the MMX mode and non-MMX mode give different output on my
Cel450/Win95OSR2? Isn't MMX supposed to give same results?
On my Linux Box with a Pentium 166 MMX the MMX and non-MMX
version produce bit identical
Mark Powell schrieb am Don, 28 Sep 2000:
Wow the speed up is real sweet. What are the other .nas files in the
i386 directory for? Specifically the fftsse.nas. Seems interesting if SSE
can speed up some aspect of the encode. From the timestamps on these files
it seems they are an abandoned
MoiN
On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 11:21:21AM +0100, Mark Powell wrote:
Wow the speed up is real sweet. What are the other .nas files in the
i386 directory for? Specifically the fftsse.nas. Seems interesting if SSE
can speed up some aspect of the encode. From the timestamps on these files
it
I had the same problem of MMX giving different results than the non-mmx.
Maybe the algorithms are different? Is that correct? Isn't MMX (assembly in
general) going to use a different algorithm, because if you are using the
same algorithm for assembly as you do in C, shouldn't the C compiler give
10 matches
Mail list logo
