rudefyet
Aug 7 2006, 14:38
20060807 has been released on the main page
QUOTE
2006/08/07 Lancer 20060807
Correcting the SSE optimization of mdct_forward and mdct_backward
Only static edition reviving vorbis_oggpack_write
Correcting the problem of local_book_besterror_dim1x4
... and now it too is "crossed out".
"2006 August 9th
Continuing with oggdropXPd of Lancer, 20060807 when you encode, because the problem which becomes output of abnormal bit rate was discovered it stops release at one time."
QUOTE(eloj @ Aug 10 2006, 00:37)
... and now it too is "crossed out".
"2006 August 9th
Continuing with oggdropXPd of Lancer, 20060807 when you encode, because the problem which becomes output of abnormal bit rate was discovered it stops release at one time."
Try a newer build.
http://homepage3.nifty.com/blacksword/exprimental/index.htm
rudefyet
Aug 11 2006, 23:02
And now 20060811 is released on the main page.
QUOTE
2006/08/11 Lancer 20060811
Correcting the SSE optimization of mdct_backward
2006/08/10 Lancer 20060810 (bit rate abnormal problem, for multithread operation problem evaluation)
Correcting the problem of the SSE optimization of _ve_amp
Correcting the problem where the pattern which each time differs in multithread operation edition is output
sony666
Aug 14 2006, 02:08
Maybe this was suggested before, but it would be beneficial to the project if he/she did the page in English, or if thats a problem ask a friend to translate it.
ありがとう - それは非常に速くある
jarsonic
Aug 14 2006, 05:53
QUOTE(sony666 @ Aug 14 2006, 04:08)
Maybe this was suggested before, but it would be beneficial to the project if he/she did the page in English, or if thats a problem ask a friend to translate it.
ありがとう - それは非常に速くある
http://translate.google.com/
jarsonic
Aug 14 2006, 17:40
I think there's a problem with the multi-threaded versions of 2006/08/11 Lancer 20060811.
I'm on a Core Duo, and I've never had problems with the multithreaded releases up to this one. Now, I'm getting speed slowdowns to 1.x and 3.x, when it was going 40-50x before. The non-multithreaded compiles work fine (40-50x); it's only the SSE2 and SSE3 multithreaded that are screwed up. Can anyone confirm?
esa372
Aug 14 2006, 18:03
QUOTE(jarsonic @ Aug 14 2006, 16:40)
Can anyone confirm?
On my system, the "sse3_mt_lancer20060811" just freezes up.
I've gone back to using the "sse3_mt_lancer20060807", which is working fine.
jarsonic
Aug 14 2006, 18:07
QUOTE(esa372 @ Aug 14 2006, 20:03)
QUOTE(jarsonic @ Aug 14 2006, 16:40)
Can anyone confirm?
On my system, the "sse3_mt_lancer20060811" just freezes up.
I've gone back to using the "sse3_mt_lancer20060807", which is working fine.
is there an online archive of past releases, or did you just already have it on your system?
esa372
Aug 14 2006, 18:20
QUOTE(jarsonic @ Aug 14 2006, 17:07)
is there an online archive of past releases, or did you just already have it on your system?
I keep several "layers" of past releases on my computer. I don't know if there's an online archive.
Here's a link for the August 07 release, if you need it:
(right-click -> "Save Target As...") oggenc283_sse3mt_lancer20060807.zip
Yamabushi
Aug 14 2006, 21:55
I had problems with the latest MT as well and have reverted to an earlier version.
Cheers,
Pete
Lancer 20060815 ExperimentalBabelfish translation:
QUOTE
It released started Lancer 20060815 for multithread operation problem verification at the laboratory.
Patsoe
Aug 15 2006, 05:52
QUOTE(sony666 @ Aug 14 2006, 09:08)
Maybe this was suggested before, but it would be beneficial to the project if he/she did the page in English, or if thats a problem ask a friend to translate it.
QUOTE
It released started Lancer 20060815 for multithread operation problem verification at the laboratory.
Lol, so much for Babelfish - Google Translate gives something similar.
It's really a problem that there's no translation available... this way we can't give the guy (girl?) feedback on how it runs/crashes on our systems, nor tell him he's doing cool and appreciated work (although he may guess that from the download numbers).
I think the author should spend some time, once the code is stable again, on getting it working on modern GCCs, like for instance getting clean compiles under linux /w GCC 4.1
I'd do if myself if I had the mad skillz, but I don't.
Franklin
Aug 18 2006, 06:57
Lancer 20060818 (MT only) is out.
Changes:
QUOTE
It improves the multithread operation processing of mapping0_forward, increases the parallel processing section and accelerates
In order with coodbook.* to make the parallel processing of floor1_encode possible, mounting the delay collective entry function of the Ogg stream
Way floor1_encode can be executed while parallel processing, modification
_vp_couple it corresponds to parallel processing
At the time of profile measurement way it does not enter into the infinite loop, modification
I will encode my whole flac archive (400cds, about 150 gb) this weekend on my amd x2 4400+ to ogg q6 oder q7.
Best regards
Franklin
PatchWorKs
Aug 18 2006, 10:17
QUOTE(PatchWorKs @ Aug 18 2006, 18:15)
I think that a bi-directional 2-pass MT encoder would be great.
I talked a guy with a Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.1GHz into running an encode, and here's the result he reported (for -q 5?):
CODE
File: "M - Pop Muzik"
OggEnc v2.83 (Lancer [20060818](SSE3MT) based on aoTuV b4b)
File length: 5m 01,0s
Elapsed time: 0m 3,432s
Rate: 87,950145
Average bitrate: 193,7 kb/s
So these new CPUs seems to be quite the little SSE monsters.
skelly831
Aug 23 2006, 20:06
EDIT: that makes me feel ashamed of my newly aquired mid-range PC
Eloj, that's very interesting, awesome performance, shame it falls short of my 100x prediction. Perhaps in -q2
Yet looking at the numbers i get a feeling the multithreading doesn't speed it up that much, is it possible for you to test the non-mt version and see how much slower it is?
QUOTE(HbG @ Aug 24 2006, 04:09)
Eloj, that's very interesting, awesome performance, shame it falls short of my 100x prediction. Perhaps in -q2
Yet looking at the numbers i get a feeling the multithreading doesn't speed it up that much, is it possible for you to test the non-mt version and see how much slower it is?
At these speeds I think Disk I/O can be a bottleneck...
See the command i used for testing on the previous page. It doesn't write an output file to disk and if you run it multiple times windows will buffer the input file in memory. For me it leads to accurately repeatable results when you discount the first run.
Also 100x is only 17.2MB/s, which any vaguely modern harddrive can easily keep up with.
Franklin
Aug 24 2006, 07:16
Hi,
new releases out: 20060824
Recently i converted 400 cds with lancer with a speed of about 50x on my X2 4400+
Best regards
Franklin
The difference seems to be that it's built on aotuv Release 1.
PatchWorKs
Aug 28 2006, 01:23
(babelfished) ChangeLog:
QUOTE
2006/08/24 Lancer 20060824
Based cord/code modification to aotuv-r1_20051117
Adding SSE optimization to _vp_couple
Adding the cord/code for multi channel processing divisions to xmmlib.h
At the time of OpenMP use the singles lead-lead _vp_quantize_couple_memo and _vp_quantize_couple_sort which are operational modification to multithread operation operation
Franklin
Sep 4 2006, 00:52
Changelog
QUOTE
2006/09/03 Lancer 20060903
Efficiency of the inline assembler cord/code for ICL detailed survey, deleting the slow part
Efficiency of cash control-related cord/code detailed survey, deleting the slow part
Efficiency of memory transfer type cord/code detailed survey and SSE optimization cord/code part revival
Improving the SSE optimization of bark_noise_hybridmp
Knocking down the renewal frequency of the lapse indication of oggenc2.
Regards
Franklin
PatchWorKs
Sep 7 2006, 04:00
Awesome... as always !
pepoluan
Sep 8 2006, 12:14
trying to use the latest & best Lancer is like joining your Build-of-the-day club...
esa372
Sep 16 2006, 17:33
QUOTE(pepoluan @ Sep 8 2006, 11:14)
trying to use the latest & best Lancer is like joining your Build-of-the-day club...
You ain't kiddin'!
Lancer 2006 09-15 is out.
jarsonic
Sep 16 2006, 18:54
QUOTE
2006/09/15 Lancer 20060915
Because binary for multithread operation from profile edition usually modification (the profile optimization effect at the time of MT is low in edition,)
Correcting the description mistake of the cord/code for MT of mapping0_forward
Executing loop unrolling with mdct_forward, mdct_backward and mdct_butterfly_generic under multithread operation environment
pepoluan
Sep 16 2006, 23:44
QUOTE(esa372 @ Sep 17 2006, 06:33)
QUOTE(pepoluan @ Sep 8 2006, 11:14)
trying to use the latest & best Lancer is like joining your Build-of-the-day club...
You ain't kiddin'!
Lancer 2006 09-15 is out.
uhhh ...
I haven't even yet unzipped the previous version... and now a new build...
*dies*
Not that I despise BlackSword and his (her?) attempts... domo arigato gozaimasu !
skelly831
Sep 16 2006, 23:56
QUOTE(pepoluan @ Sep 16 2006, 22:44)
I haven't even yet unzipped the previous version... and now a new build...
LOL
Squeller
Sep 17 2006, 03:56
No sse build?
QUOTE(Squeller @ Sep 17 2006, 17:56)
No sse build?
It looks like 20060915 build is a MT-only bugfix build.
nyaochi
Oct 5 2006, 09:18
2006/10/05 Lancer 20061005:
- Updated ICL to 9.1.030
- Improved MT optimization code for mapping0_forward
- Tweaked compile options
- Suppress some compiling warnings
- Discontinue GCC support
This release is memorial to me as this binary (with -q4) runs faster than 100x on my new machine.
http://nyaochi.sakura.ne.jp/encoder-benchm...t-20061005.htmlMany thanks to 637 (Blacksword) for the brilliant achievement!
guruboolez
Oct 5 2006, 09:33
This is really impressive. I remember the old time (pre-RC3 encoder) when Vorbis was painfully slow: x1,5 max on my Duron 800 - up to 3...4 time slower than musepack (not present in this big benchmark), and same speed than LAME --alt-preset extreme.
QUOTE(nyaochi @ Oct 5 2006, 21:18)
2006/10/05 Lancer 20061005:
- Discontinue GCC support
Sadly to read but it's more truely as a number of previous versions not worked after GCC correctly.
But under
wine oggenc2.exe will work anyway.
Man, that truly sucks. This should be written with GCC intrinsics, not ICC. Anyone tried building it with the linux version of ICC?
QUOTE
This release is memorial to me as this binary (with -q4) runs faster than 100x on my new machine.
My congratulations to you!
Franklin
Oct 16 2006, 04:37
2006/10/13 Lancer 20061013
Correcting the problem of the memory management cord/code
Regards
Franklin
de Mon
Oct 20 2006, 09:08
Hmm. On my AMD 2400 it is slower (1x-2x) than ver 2005 11 21
Is it ok?
maacruz
Oct 28 2006, 13:33
QUOTE(eloj @ Oct 5 2006, 19:13)
Man, that truly sucks. This should be written with GCC intrinsics, not ICC. Anyone tried building it with the linux version of ICC?
Agreed
PatchWorKs
Nov 3 2006, 05:52
New version out (20061103), here's the -babelfished- changelog:
QUOTE
Based cord/code modification to aotuv-b5_20061024
Modifying the SSE optimization of _vp_offset_and_mix, _vp_noise_normalize_sort and _vp_couple
ICL in 9.1.032 version rise
Correcting the description mistake of the optimization cord/code
website
Franklin
Nov 11 2006, 07:47
Release 20061110 is out:
QUOTE
2006/11/03 Lancer 20061110
Correcting the trouble which cannot encode the monaural sound source in multithread operation edition.
Improving the SSE optimization of _vp_couple.
Modifying the calculation which disperses the load at the time of the multithread operation of _vp_couple.
Reducing the cord/code of _vp_offset_and_mix.
Regards
Franklin
dariju
Nov 11 2006, 08:28
I've made a little comparison between standard
OggEnc Win32 aoTuV beta5 2006/11/11
and
oggenc283_sse3mt_lancer20061110
Results are quite impressive:
CODE
c:\ogg>oggenc -q2 "thom yorke - harrowdown hill.wav"
Opening with wav module: WAV file reader
Encoding "thom yorke - harrowdown hill.wav" to
"thom yorke - harrowdown hill.ogg"
at quality 2,00
[100,0%] [ 0m00s remaining] -
Done encoding file "thom yorke - harrowdown hill.ogg"
File length: 4m 41,0s
Elapsed time: 0m 15,0s
Rate: 18,7956
Average bitrate: 92,6 kb/s
c:\ogg>oggenc2 -q2 "thom yorke - harrowdown hill.wav"
Opening with wav module: WAV file reader
Encoding "thom yorke - harrowdown hill.wav" to
"thom yorke - harrowdown hill.ogg"
at quality 2,00
[100,0%] [ 0m00s remaining] \
Done encoding file "thom yorke - harrowdown hill.ogg"
File length: 4m 41,0s
Elapsed time: 0m 2,834s
Rate: 99,482475
Average bitrate: 92,6 kb/s
Lancer is 5.5 times faster...
Seimour
Nov 12 2006, 05:51
Anyone knows where to get one of these optimized vorbis builds for Linux?. Can
this patch be applied to vorbis' source code and then be built? Using which compiler?
Thanks in advance!
nyaochi
Nov 13 2006, 06:21
QUOTE(dariju @ Nov 11 2006, 23:28)
Lancer is 5.5 times faster...
Yeah, I wanted to modify the title of this thread but couldn't.
QUOTE(Seimour @ Nov 12 2006, 20:51)
Anyone knows where to get one of these optimized vorbis builds for Linux?. Can
this patch be applied to vorbis' source code and then be built? Using which compiler?
Intel C/C++ compiler. I'm not sure whether if it can be compiled with the linux version of the compiler.
He dropped GCC support a while back, didn't he? Or was it just code that's untested on gcc?
PatchWorKs
Nov 29 2006, 03:42
QUOTE(Gabriel @ Nov 29 2006, 10:02)
Current Lame versions (3.98) can be compiled in 64bits mode, that is how I am using it most of the time.
Using VC8 as a compiler, it increases encoding speed by about 20% compared to 32bits mode.
Josiah McGuckin
Dec 22 2006, 17:48
While trying to sound as un-redundant as possible, I observed speeds as high as 24.2x (primarily in the range of 16-20x), compared to only 10.0'ish from what I remember last... and while I didn't run actual comparisons of the files using any kind of sophisticated process, I
did ABX and compare bitrates/qualities of files using both aotuv-b5 and the latest lancer build and was unable to distinguish between the two. Beautiful
... thanks guys!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.