Where can I get more details regarding an issue fixed in IPP 7.02

Where can I get more details regarding an issue fixed in IPP 7.02

Emmanuel W.'s picture

Hi,

The following item is mentionned in the list of issue fixed in IPP 7 update 2.

DPD200137548
H.264 Decompression on x64 is significantly slower compared to x32.

It sounds like a serious issue but there is no detail about the fix or situation in which the problem happen.

-Is this a sample fix, a library fix or both ?
-Is this an issue in IPP 6.1 or was this a bug introduced in IPP 7 ?
-Is this an issue with any H.264 stream or only specific profiles ?

Thanks

9 posts / 0 new
Last post
For more complete information about compiler optimizations, see our Optimization Notice.
vladimir-dudnik (Intel)'s picture

Hello,

this issue was related to the level of optimization for primitive functions. No H.264 sample code changes involved.

Regards,
Vladimir

Emmanuel W.'s picture

Great thanks, and I suspect that the less optimized code was also in IPP 6.1.

Paul Fischer (Intel)'s picture

Yes, the optimization problems also existed in the 6.1 code.

Emmanuel W.'s picture

I have run several tests using sample version 6.1 and IPP 6.1 vs 7.02 and can't find any difference in term of speed.

vladimir-dudnik (Intel)'s picture

Have you compared performance on IA32 vs Intel64 architectures?

Vladimir

Emmanuel W.'s picture

No I just tested the two versions on 64bits expecting to see an improvment (no 32 bits system on hands).

Emmanuel

vladimir-dudnik (Intel)'s picture

Hi Emmanuel,

a lot of factors may affect performance comparison. But for this particular issue we have a confirmation that it was fixed from customer who has intially reported about it. Below are performance data on IPP functions

IPP 6.1 IPP 7.0.2 intel64 intel64 ia32 ippiReconstructLumaIntra8x8_H264High_32s16u_IP1R 2.56 0.385 0.574 ippiReconstructChroma422Inter4x4_H264High_32s16u_IP2R 0.897 0.158 0.19 ippiDecodeCAVLCCoeffs_H264_1u32s 0.528 0.467 0.445 ippiReconstructChroma422Intra4x4_H264High_32s16u_IP2R 0.14 0.079 0.061

Regards,
Vladimir

Emmanuel W.'s picture

Thanks Vladimir,

I didn't use 8x8 transform or 422 sampling in my tests so that makes sence ;)

Emmanuel

Login to leave a comment.