On Di, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:04:00 (CET), Fabian Greffrath wrote: > Am 23.01.2012 14:53, schrieb Reinhard Tartler: >> The reason is that x264 uses a lot of hand written assembler, and >> upstream takes care to use non-pic code only on architectures that >> support this. >> >> Btw, the same applies to the libav* packages. > > Is there any benchmark available (for either package) that compares the > performance of the library using the hand written assambler code with > one using generic code?
Have a look at upstream commit logs. Many commit messages count cpu cycles as performance speedup. http://git.videolan.org/?p=x264.git;a=commitdiff;h=748fe16c1303b89d2a1d0378addd83fb4198f51a http://git.videolan.org/?p=x264.git;a=commitdiff;h=6b06f6d3f7f800dca1a4ea154f54427d5b3cea2b no name only some very recent ones. Cheers, Reinhard -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4 _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
