what software do i need to compile LAME on the new box im getting?

we have some opteron dev boxes at uni i could use... im told there are a few different compilers - i always program on linux for my course, and so im a total n00b here.

seeing as all the version posted seem to be made with ICL (whatever that is) i assume thats the preferred "way".

... i had part of my classical collection shipped up from home (200+ cds) a bit of time saved thanks to a 64-bit LAME is something id appreciate

JT

You can use gcc (under cygwin), msvc or msvc+icl.
I am not sure if a 64bits version woudl be faster, as you will not benefit from the assembly optimisations (they are in mmx and 3dnow, and they do no exist under x86-64)

aaaahhh yes of course.. inline asm... *smacks forehead*

.. i think ill try it anyway.. just to see wether its

A: faster
B: slower
C: makes no difference whatsoever
D: banana plumcake

thankyou!

JT

Another option that I prefer is MinGW (gcc for Windows).


New compilers can optimize for 64 bit processors so you can be wrong here.

AnandTech tested 64 vs 32 bits versions, compiled with gcc. The difference was about 30% faster for the 64bits version. But in both case they disabled the nasm functions.

If you want to know how much removing the asm functions will cost, you can try "lame --noasm 3dnow --noasm mmx". This will disable the mmx and 3dnow assembly functions.

How to compile LAME with MingW?
i got some error while compiling,
can't get LAME.exe and the DLL, too bad,
I've heard that MingW compiled LAME version or other encoder is reported slower than MSVC or ICL(of course), why?
I am sucessfully compiling FAAC, but i remember FAAC encoding speed is ~3.40x only...
My CPU is P4 2.4GHz.

Sounds weird...I would expect such a machine to encode at 8x at least...

http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/ is another option

@Gabriel

Have you thought about porting the assembler to x86-64? YASM can compile for x86-64... (See what the mplayer guys did.)

Even SSE intrinsics would work on x86-64.
If someone wants to work on the assembly for Lame, he would be welcome. I personnally do not have time for it.

I did some tests when I bought my AMD64 box and it turns out that 64 bit (on Linux, gcc 3.4 -m64 -march=k8 -O2) is faster than 32 bit with assembly by an average of about ten percent. I would post the results but the box they are on is now considered "evidence" (not anything to do with me).

If you need that extra little bit, it's worth recompiling. If you encode in the background while doing other stuff it probably isn't worth the effort needed to set up a compiler.

Sorry, is the encoding speed is around 4x, MingW compiled version(with --disable-mp4v2),
For ICL 8.1 compiled version, encoding speed is aroubd 11x.
The version downloaded form rarewares.org is ~7x

Now is event wierd, i got the frontt end only but no lame.dll,
I must be missing some libraries or components...
I'm a n00b for programming or compiling...