Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Crossfeed 0.666 Released (Read 8996 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #25 –
Quote
Is the speed difference here due to the FPU bug or due the the superior Athlon processing?

The test sample generated doesn't exploit the Intel FPU bug, so this just seems to be a case where the Athlon performs better.

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #26 –
Duron 600  -  Windows 2000

Code: [Select]
Undithered: 60.000s processed in 1.594s. 37.641x.
  Dithered: 60.000s processed in 2.266s. 26.478x.



Hmm, that's almost exactly the came as the Athlon 600 Thunderbird.
Sorry, I have nothing witty to say here.

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #27 –
Quote
The test sample generated doesn't exploit the Intel FPU bug, so this just seems to be a case where the Athlon performs better.

Definately.
I have a Pentium 4, 2.53ghz, undithered in 0.703s. 85.349x. dithered in 0.938s. 63.966x.
Athlon definately performs much better.

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #28 –
Well i don't think that there should be any code optimisations, because i beleave that there's no P4 where it wont run fast enough.
(where did that Spell check gone?)
 

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #29 –
Quote
The OS is Win98, with about 120MB of RAM.


Maybe the memory is the factor behind the apparent anomaly. The PC where I ran the benchmark only has 24 MB of RAM. It has Win98 SE (installed with 98lite 4.5) and when I ran the benchmark it had no programs running besides the explorer shell (no antivirus or other background programs that can be observed in win98's task manager).

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #30 –
Quote
Athlon definately performs much better.

No kidding.  Here are the results for my system:
Athlon XP 1900+ @1.6GHz, 512MB PC2100, nForce1 Chipset:

Code: [Select]
Performance Report:
Undithered: 60.000s processed in 0.500s. 120.000x.
  Dithered: 60.000s processed in 0.734s. 81.744x.

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #31 –
AMD Athlon XP 2000+, 512 MB DDRAM PC2700:
Code: [Select]
Generating test sample... done.
Benchmarking undithered performance... done.
Regenerating test sample... done.
Benchmarking dithered performance... done.

Performance Report:
Undithered: 60.000s processed in 0.490s. 122.449x.
   Dithered: 60.000s processed in 0.711s. 84.388x.

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #32 –
AMD Athlon T-Bird 1400mhz w/ 256mb PC2100 Ram & Via KT266a Chipset

Quote
Generating test sample... done.
Benchmarking undithered performance... done.
Regenerating test sample... done.
Benchmarking dithered performance... done.

Performance Report:
Undithered: 60.000s processed in 0.641s. 93.604x.
  Dithered: 60.000s processed in 0.881s. 68.104x.

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #33 –
Hmmm... Intel Pentium 4 2530, Athlon XP 1.6GHz, AMD Athlon XP 2000+ 512 MB DDRAM PC2700, AMD Athlon T-Bird 1400mhz w/ 256mb PC2100 Ram & Via KT266a Chipset... I wish I had one of these "low-end" systems    You are all no match for my P2 400MHz 

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #34 –
Interesting seeing the benchmarks of different systems. Here's mine (Athlon XP 1800+, 512MBs PC2700, Nforce2, XP Pro):
Code: [Select]
Performance Report:
Undithered: 60.000s processed in 0.516s. 116.279x.
Dithered: 60.000s processed in 0.750s. 80.000x.

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #35 –
Code: [Select]
Performance Report:
Undithered: 60.000s processed in 0.500s. 120.000x.
Dithered: 60.000s processed in 0.719s. 83.449x.


Athlon 2000+, KT333, 512DDR PC2100

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #36 –
<insert Rodney Dangerfield accent>
Whoa, where am I, HardOCP or something? It's benchmark city here!
</try to block out the thought of Rodney Dangerfield>

edit (on-topic): Trelane, will you be posting the source-code for the current version?

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #37 –
Quote
Trelane, will you be posting the source-code for the current version?

When I decide which license I want to use, yes.

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #38 –
Quote
indybrett:
The Intel P1 90 results are nice. I didn't think it would run nearly that fast on that CPU.

Sorry, my bad. It's an Intel P1 133, not a P90.
flac > schiit modi > schiit magni > hd650

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #39 –
Hi, trelane!
so this improved ver. of your delightful plugin approaches a little more to usage w/ hw DSP contained in some well known mp3 player (who said iriver?  ) .... 
if u become a rich person, please remember me   

MAX il bYOndo (do u remember my email?)

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #40 –
Old K6 crappy computer benchmark

With full load of programs running
Quote
Performance Report:
Undithered: 60.000s processed in 20.770s. 2.889x.
  Dithered: 60.000s processed in 26.590s. 2.256x.


With least amount loaded
Quote
Performance Report:                             
Undithered: 60.000s processed in 5.600s. 10.714x.
  Dithered: 60.000s processed in 7.740s. 7.752x.
"Something bothering you, Mister Spock?"

Crossfeed 0.666 Released

Reply #41 –
Intel PIII 650

Performance Report:
Undithered: 60.000s processed in 2.310s. 25.974x.
  Dithered: 60.000s processed in 3.020s. 19.868x.
wagner reatto