Le jeu. 6 juin 2024 à 08:11, Rémi Denis-Courmont <r...@remlab.net> a écrit : > >James Almer: > >> uyvytoyuv422_c: 23991.8 > >> uyvytoyuv422_sse2: 2817.8 > >> uyvytoyuv422_avx: 2819.3 > > > >Why don't you nuke the avx version in a follow-up patch? > > Same problem with the RGBA stuff as well. Are the AVX functions expected to > be faster than SSE2 on processors *without* AVX2?
Something frequent in this type of questions is that people are using numbers from a CPU that has had 10 years of arch improvements (and probably a doubling in throughput for any instruction set) over one that supported at most AVX. The presence of an AVX function (whose benefit is only 3-operand instructions, so admittedly small) would ideally only be benchmarked on that kind of CPUs. Case in point, at that time, even x264 introduced avx versions, so there was a time and CPU generations where yes, it was faster: https://code.videolan.org/search?search=INIT_XMM%20avx&nav_source=navbar&project_id=536&group_id=9&search_code=true&repository_ref=master https://code.videolan.org/videolan/x264/-/commit/abc2283e9abc6254744bf6dd148ac25433cdf80e But I understand the point is that any type of maintenance for a minor improvement to few CPUs, which are maybe 1% of a userbase, is not appealing. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
