> From: Pierre Darbon et Hurgon J.Sebastien [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> I'm a newbie, and I wonder how the Windows binary found in the Russian
> site (http://www.chat.ru/~dkutsanov/index.htm) was compiled.
> I supposed
> it's done with Microsoft Visual C
I think so.
>, but I want to know if it
> is optimized
> for i586, i686 or anything else. I don't own MSVC myself, so I can't
> understand the parameters in the Makefile.
If it's been built using the MSVC Makefile, it will be optimised for P6
(Pentium Pro or Pentium II). I think the workspace/project files (for
building within the MSVC IDE) use the same setting (/G6).
> I'm personnally using the CygWin package (Freeware,
> http://sourceware.cygnus.com/cygwin/) to compile the Lame sources, but
> even with the i686 tweaks (I have a good old PentiumPro), it's slower
> than the Russian binary (Well, it's 3-4% slower, not too
> bad...)
There are some optimisations in the MSVC version not present in the gcc/iX86
version - namely the full assembly implementation of quantize_xrpow[_ISO] in
quantize-pvt.c. On top of that, MSVC is very good with floating point code,
better than gcc and (I think) better even than Intel's reference compiler.
pgcc (a custom version of gcc for Pentium CPUs) might fare better if you can
find/build it for Windows. pgcc is the default compiler on my "experimental"
Linux system (Mandrake 6.something) and does seem to improve speed a little
over regular gcc.
> and a lot, lot bigger (But with today's drives, who cares...)
You probably only need to strip the debug info out of the executable. Try
"strip lame.exe" after compiling.
-- Mat.
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
