https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Hello-guys-the-performance/m-p/939403#M17538 <DIV>Hello, IPP guys,</DIV><DIV></DIV><DIV>I have questions for you. We are using CE IPP for processing the DSP in ARM plaform. So most DSP prcessing is done by using IPP library. but We need more speed up. So we are thinking of migrating our source code from C to ASM. but mostly C code is controlling of conditions. How much performance improvement would be if we do?</DIV><DIV></DIV><DIV>Also, I found that IPP 4.1 is much safer than IPP5.0. I don't know why. 4.1 is safer, faster and even small code size.</DIV><DIV></DIV><DIV>Thank you.</DIV> Thu, 23 Mar 2006 01:14:22 GMT ysyoon 2006-03-23T01:14:22Z https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Hello-guys-the-performance/m-p/939403#M17538 <DIV>Hello, IPP guys,</DIV><DIV></DIV><DIV>I have questions for you. We are using CE IPP for processing the DSP in ARM plaform. So most DSP prcessing is done by using IPP library. but We need more speed up. So we are thinking of migrating our source code from C to ASM. but mostly C code is controlling of conditions. How much performance improvement would be if we do?</DIV><DIV></DIV><DIV>Also, I found that IPP 4.1 is much safer than IPP5.0. I don't know why. 4.1 is safer, faster and even small code size.</DIV><DIV></DIV><DIV>Thank you.</DIV> Thu, 23 Mar 2006 01:14:22 GMT https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Hello-guys-the-performance/m-p/939403#M17538 ysyoon 2006-03-23T01:14:22Z https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Hello-guys-the-performance/m-p/939404#M17539 <DIV></DIV> <P>Hi, what IPP do you use? Did you try IPP for IXP?</P> <P>Regards,<BR /> Vladimir</P> Thu, 30 Mar 2006 05:33:44 GMT https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Hello-guys-the-performance/m-p/939404#M17539 Vladimir_Dudnik 2006-03-30T05:33:44Z