> I am not quite sure how internally those _mm_* functions work, but if > those are really functions, it will definitely hurt the performance. I > think use assembly SSE2 instruction set directly (like paddw) should be > much better. > > Vic > The _mm_* functions are compiler intrinsics and map 1:1 to the corresponding SSE instructions. It's just a nicer and cleaner interface to the instruction set (and there is no function call overhead).
-Martin > On 06/10/2011 02:09 PM, S. Erisman wrote: >> Yeah, those are similar numbers to what I am getting as well. I even >> setup a new ubuntu machine to make sure it wasn't just the test machine >> I was using. I'm beginning to think that maybe using SSE isn't the best >> way to optimize this. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content > authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image > Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Freerdp-devel mailing list > Freerdp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freerdp-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Freerdp-devel mailing list Freerdp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freerdp-devel
