On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 20:35:37 +0000
"Fred Nevez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi
> i would like to know if there is any chance to have an AMD64 compiled 
> version of Lame codec from you ?
> Thanks A LOT (please reply me yes or no it will avoid me to wait :))

The LAME project doesn't distribute binary version of LAME, so there's
_no_ chance the get LAME for Win64 from _us_.

Side note: I don't _expect_ a performance gain in using a AMD64 compiled
version. Switching from 32bit to 64bit results in a larger executable
(as pointers grow from 32 to 64 bits). This may result in a _slower_
executable, as the resulting code may not fit into the CPU cache
anymore. The cache would play ping-pong in this case (switching between
parts of the code). I've read about a performance loss of 20-30% for
some specific applications (but with sparc64, not amd64).

If someone compares the performance between an ia32 and amd64 compiled
version of LAME, I would be interested to know the actual numbers.

Win64 should be able to run Win32 programs, so I suggest to use the
Win32 version of LAME.

> PS : Perhaps this can help you for compilation : 
> http://www.collosumus.net/amd64/pgm/cl_1.html

I've CCed the lame development list and the general MP3 encoder list.
Perhaps someone is interested in helping you.

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
           I will be available to get hired in April 2004.

http://www.Leidinger.net                       Alexander @ Leidinger.net
  GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91  3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7
_______________________________________________
mp3encoder mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder

Reply via email to