On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 16:26 +0100, [email protected] wrote: > On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 02:57:44PM +0000, Folderol wrote: > > > Paul Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > there's an awful lot of math for which a modern processor can compute > > > the answer faster than it can look it up. this is one such example (as > > > fons noted), but there are many others. this started changing about 8 > > > years ago, and its only gotten more true since then. > > > > Oh dear. I didn't realise I was so far out of date :( > > It's absolutely true. > > Note that the calculation I posted earlier runs entirely on > the FP processor, and two variables, q and d, will probably > only exist there and never be written to memory. If it takes > any time at all, the CPU can meanwhile do something else, > such as getting the pointers to the audio data it will need > later. Using a LUT will mean the CPU has to do all the work, > which includes getting the base pointer and calculating the > required offset(s). > > Ciao,
Just to ensure you aren't talking about different claims. Is math even faster, as e.g. 4 states for left, 1 for centre and 4 states for right, provided e.g. by an array? Or are you thinking about nearly stepless panning? *?* Ralf _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
