Matt,
In an earlier post your mentioned that the CCC filter implementations
had been considerably improved. Here are the results on my machine
(2.4GHz P4 no HT)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tests $ ./benchmark_dotprod
generic: taps: 256 input: 4e+07 cpu: 11.630 taps/sec: 8.805e+08
SSE: taps: 256 input: 4e+07 cpu: 4.563 taps/sec: 2.244e+09
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tests $ ./benchmark_dotprod_ccc
generic: taps: 256 input: 4e+07 cpu: 103.184 taps/sec: 9.924e+07
SSE: taps: 256 input: 4e+07 cpu: 16.019 taps/sec: 6.393e+08
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tests $ ./benchmark_dotprod_ccf
generic: taps: 256 input: 4e+07 cpu: 100.301 taps/sec: 1.021e+08
SSE: taps: 256 input: 4e+07 cpu: 12.830 taps/sec: 7.981e+08
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tests $ ./benchmark_dotprod_fcc
generic: taps: 256 input: 4e+07 cpu: 86.419 taps/sec: 1.185e+08
SSE: taps: 256 input: 4e+07 cpu: 14.059 taps/sec: 7.284e+08
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tests $ ./benchmark_dotprod_fsf
generic: taps: 256 input: 4e+07 cpu: 27.738 taps/sec: 3.692e+08
SSE: taps: 256 input: 4e+07 cpu: 21.264 taps/sec: 4.816e+08
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tests $ ./benchmark_dotprod_scc
generic: taps: 256 input: 4e+07 cpu: 94.179 taps/sec: 1.087e+08
SSE: taps: 256 input: 4e+07 cpu: 31.658 taps/sec: 3.235e+08
The SSRP produces short input and I usually connect it to a frequency
xlating scf filter. While I don't have a scf benchmark, it looks like
the the ccc filter is 2x faster than the scc filter in SSE mode. If my
math is correct, a ccc filter requires more operations per tap than a
scc filter?!? Could similar improvements be made in the sc* filters or
should I cast my incoming short data stream into a complex stream?
Thanks,
David Carr
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
