now would be the perfect time for a new ReClock release
Yes, expiration date is getting closer.
Thanks in advance (though I do not have any problems with the current version!)
now would be the perfect time for a new ReClock release
The link is on the first post of this thread. But remember is not yet the final. After James release his build, let's compare it with the one linked here and if Jame's build is faster I will remove my link. Please post here the compare results.Can you link to the final, agreed, optimised, compiled version of the Resampler?
James, here it is:Could you post the current sources?
Another thing, to save you some trouble... You will need a compiler which supports 1999 ISO Standard C. The ICL10.1 does.
Uh-oh. I'm not sure if VS2005 does.
Let me know what you want to do. Just keep my build linked in this thread and keep the 0.1.4 version with your reclock installer, or remove my build and just forget about 0.1.5...Just tried, it doesn't.
I changed the source a little and it compiles with VS2005 (ignoring some warnings). No big deal. I'll release ReClock 1.8.3.1 beta in a second...Let me know what you want to do. Just keep my build linked in this thread and keep the 0.1.4 version with your reclock installer, or remove my build and just forget about 0.1.5...
awesome, muchas graciasI changed the source a little and it compiles with VS2005 (ignoring some warnings). No big deal. I'll release ReClock 1.8.3.1 beta in a second...
After James release his build, let's compare it with the one linked here and if Jame's build is faster I will remove my link. Please post here the compare results.
I am quite sure your build is faster (using a better compiler). Nevertheless, I'm quite happy with my build.After James release his build, let's compare it with the one linked here and if Jame's build is faster I will remove my link. Please post here the compare results.
I have said this because with 0.1.4 I found that your build was a little faster than mine, but with 0.1.5 it appears that's not the case anymore. No problem, I'm not in a race, I am just looking for the better option.I am quite sure your build is faster (using a better compiler). Nevertheless, I'm quite happy with my build.
With MT you mean multi threading/tasking? No way. Better optimized code, that's all.ok so I've picked 3 movies, basically yesgrey3's generic O3 build's faster for 6 channels, and it's very close for stereo....maybe James build's a bit faster in that particular case.
but for very high bitrate movies(non h264), yesgrey3's build less CPU intensive(better MT management?)...even for stereo
Really? That's a little unexpected.I have said this because with 0.1.4 I found that your build was a little faster than mine,
but with 0.1.5 it appears that's not the case anymore. No problem, I'm not in a race, I am just looking for the better option.
In the next days I will build a new version using ICL11... Let's see if I can defeat myself...
leeperry, stay tuned, once again you'll be the judge...
Not so. My build was with O2 optimizations, and have found with this one that O3 is better. Maybe the previous also was better with O3, but now it's not worth trying it.Really? That's a little unexpected.
Haven't you read this thread from start (the SSSE3 version included all SIMDs up to SSSE3)? I have build several versions and the faster was the generic build... I don't think it's weird, maybe it's the code that doesn't need the SIMDs, or that the assembly generated is of poor quality to this kind of code...Are you using any optimization options, like MMX/SSE/SSE2/...?
That aside, I tried the global optimizer and SSE2 in VS2005, and resampler was getting slower. Really weird.
Obviously not... or I've forgotten... shame on me...Haven't you read this thread from start (the SSSE3 version included all SIMDs up to SSSE3)?
Quote: Originally Posted by yesgrey3
Another thing, to save you some trouble... You will need a compiler which supports 1999 ISO Standard C. The ICL10.1 does.
Quote: Originally Posted by James
Uh-oh. I'm not sure if VS2005 does.
No, as executables compiled with VS2008 won't run on Windows 9x/ME and NT4.Just, a note for you James, you ever thought about using VS2008?
IMHO it's a lot better.
No problem.Obviously not... or I've forgotten... shame on me...
Can you tell me the date and size (in bytes) of the file?but the original ICL10 build (0.1.4?) was clearly multi-core capable.
No. It may look like this, depending which thread calls ReClock's "RenderSample", and on which core this thread is scheduled.One small thing though. Its much less important now, since this build is so much more efficient, but the original ICL10 build (0.1.4?) was clearly multi-core capable.