Support and General Use > Audio Playback, Database and Playlists
Codec Efficiency Comparison Test (iPod)
saratoga:
--- Quote from: bk on October 09, 2006, 05:07:18 PM ---
--- Quote ---I don't see how you can conclude this. Given the differences in ISA, power consumption and battery capacity, its entirely possible that they're equally worthwhile. For instance, Coldfire could be highly optimized, but poorly suited for the task, while ARM could be poorly optimized, but well suited.
--- End quote ---
I don't understand what you mean by 'well suited'. These are all general purpose embedded processors, if code is well optimized for ColdFire it will run fast and the tests will show that. Likewise for ARM, etc.
--- End quote ---
Theres no reason well optimized code will run fast. The problem may simply difficult or poorly suited for the hardware. For instance, code that depends on coldfire's MAC may never run well on PP CPUs that have to do seperate multiply and add operations.
Davide-NYC:
Now that the test_codec plugin exists we can now revisit this topic.
The test plugin, when using the "Speed Test Folder" option outputs a very simple log file. If we could append the results in a Twiki friendly format to the end of the same file we'd be on our way to getting many users to submit results for all targets. (I'm not sure who submitted the plugin to begin with)
* We need to expand the encoder batchfile to include WMA and (maybe) APE.
* We may want to choose a more dynamic, less noisy sample file.
* If the test_codec output could be modified to be a bit more Twiki friendly that would rule.
See here if you're not sure what I'm talking about.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version