Ok, running sinf/cosf with bounded values gives better performance results (close to sin/cos ones).
I think the binding "trick" should be written in the manpages as a note on amd64 (at least) because the behavior is different on i386 and clearly not expected... Anyway, I still can't get the performance I had on the same hardware : + 0.94 secs on 32 bits sinf/cosf without bound values + 1.07 secs on 64 bits sinf/cosf with manual binding. Do you know how the asm in the lib binds the input value (I mean for the optimised sin/cos versions for example) ? Jerome On Monday 08 March 2010, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > Jerome Vizcaino a écrit : > > What do you mean sinf/cosf is supposed to be twice faster ? > > You're mentionning calling it with bound values ? > > Yes, with the current code and bounded values, it is twice faster. This > is not the case anymore with the assembly code, as the same FPU > instruction (fcos/fsin/fsincos) is used for the three versions (float, > double, long double). > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
