2007/4/17, Attila Kinali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 19:26:15 +0200
"Nicolas Boulay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, the only reasonable way to do that is to optimize the hardware
> > for this specific task.
>
> I think about a generic cpu to avoid the need to create a good
> compiler. But you could always add an idct in hardware and the need
> for a powerfull cpu vanished at the cost of few modification in the
> codec used (motion compensation need power too ?). Beside that, all of
> this is very close to all the graphical ressources.
I don't fully understand what you mean here. Could
you explain it a little bit?
Few years ago, i had profiled ffmpeg. 98% of the cpu was used by the iDCT.
I know that things change a lot for HD, motion compensation need now a
lot of cpu too.
Such iDCT are a 100 ASM line function. It's very localised. So it's
very easy to track and modify a codec to use an hardware accelerator
or a specific taylord instruction.
So for the 2% of generic work you use a generic cpu and for the iDCT a
specific core or a new instruction (new instruction or tightly
connected coprocesseur that share registers with the cpu are great to
minimise communication latency)
I leave out the rest of your mail, as i don't have any
knowledge about 3D programming at all.
Attila Kinali
--
Linux ist... wenn man einfache Dinge auch mit einer kryptischen
post-fix Sprache loesen kann
-- Daniel Hottinger
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
