<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic IPP v4 G.729 Sample Question in Intel® Integrated Performance Primitives</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/IPP-v4-G-729-Sample-Question/m-p/961559#M19716</link>
    <description>Hi;&lt;BR /&gt;I just test the G.729 Encode/Decode sample and I found interested results:&lt;BR /&gt;The Computer is a Pentium 4 2.4 GH ( no HT ) running Windows 2000.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Whe I run the sample as is ( using the provided code and the DLLs ) I got for a PCM of 6 seconds:&lt;BR /&gt;Encode: ~25 Mh&lt;BR /&gt;Decode: ~ 7 Mh&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;But when I compile it with the "Single processor method" and linking with static libraries ( ipp*merged.lib ) using px, w7 or even t7 I got:&lt;BR /&gt;Encode: ~56 Mh&lt;BR /&gt;Decode: ~25 Mh&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Why the DLL code is faster than the static-lib code ?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;It is normal that using the static-libraries the G.729 Encode/Decode exe files are around 1MB ? ( The same using the DLL are around 50KB )&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I'm evaluatng the IPP libraries to use them for voice compression for a VoIP client software that will run on Windows, Linux and PDAs, and the size of the code is very important. We are evaluating other libraries and the size of the code ( for example encode/decode 729 ) is aroung 90KB. We also will try it for Vide encoding ( H.263, H.263+ ), Where can I found the H.263 Encode Sample ???&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Thanks</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2004 01:15:39 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>incarose</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2004-04-28T01:15:39Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>IPP v4 G.729 Sample Question</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/IPP-v4-G-729-Sample-Question/m-p/961559#M19716</link>
      <description>Hi;&lt;BR /&gt;I just test the G.729 Encode/Decode sample and I found interested results:&lt;BR /&gt;The Computer is a Pentium 4 2.4 GH ( no HT ) running Windows 2000.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Whe I run the sample as is ( using the provided code and the DLLs ) I got for a PCM of 6 seconds:&lt;BR /&gt;Encode: ~25 Mh&lt;BR /&gt;Decode: ~ 7 Mh&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;But when I compile it with the "Single processor method" and linking with static libraries ( ipp*merged.lib ) using px, w7 or even t7 I got:&lt;BR /&gt;Encode: ~56 Mh&lt;BR /&gt;Decode: ~25 Mh&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Why the DLL code is faster than the static-lib code ?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;It is normal that using the static-libraries the G.729 Encode/Decode exe files are around 1MB ? ( The same using the DLL are around 50KB )&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I'm evaluatng the IPP libraries to use them for voice compression for a VoIP client software that will run on Windows, Linux and PDAs, and the size of the code is very important. We are evaluating other libraries and the size of the code ( for example encode/decode 729 ) is aroung 90KB. We also will try it for Vide encoding ( H.263, H.263+ ), Where can I found the H.263 Encode Sample ???&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Thanks</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2004 01:15:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/IPP-v4-G-729-Sample-Question/m-p/961559#M19716</guid>
      <dc:creator>incarose</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-04-28T01:15:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: IPP v4 G.729 Sample Question</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/IPP-v4-G-729-Sample-Question/m-p/961560#M19717</link>
      <description>HI..I had the opportunity to work optimizing G.723.1 and G.729.1 to reduce proccessing and to reduce the size of the code..I worked in asm. Basically you must know the arquitecture of the processor o the types of chips where you desire to run your codec..You can reduce the size and to improve the yield.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;H.263 you find in ITU.. &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;best regards</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2004 06:12:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/IPP-v4-G-729-Sample-Question/m-p/961560#M19717</guid>
      <dc:creator>pablopl</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-04-28T06:12:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: IPP v4 G.729 Sample Question</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/IPP-v4-G-729-Sample-Question/m-p/961561#M19718</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;H.263 video encoder functionality is supported in MPEG4 encoder sample provided with IPP. Please take a look on it. You need to set some parametersin .PAR file to force MPEG4 encoder to generate H.263 bitstream.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;BR /&gt; Vladimir&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2004 13:55:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/IPP-v4-G-729-Sample-Question/m-p/961561#M19718</guid>
      <dc:creator>Intel_C_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-04-28T13:55:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: IPP v4 G.729 Sample Question</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/IPP-v4-G-729-Sample-Question/m-p/961562#M19719</link>
      <description>&lt;DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I would expect H.263 encoder to be much simpler and easier to read than MPEG-4 one ( especially if you have noISO standards ).Maybe someone extracted pure H.263 encoder from the IPP sample ?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I use a static libs'ippiemerged.lib', 'ippimerged.lib'. Do Ineed to worry about performance degradation when using static libs ?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:18:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/IPP-v4-G-729-Sample-Question/m-p/961562#M19719</guid>
      <dc:creator>Maciej_K_</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-04-28T17:18:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: IPP v4 G.729 Sample Question</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/IPP-v4-G-729-Sample-Question/m-p/961563#M19720</link>
      <description>&lt;DIV&gt;Hi,&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;
&lt;P&gt;we do not provide separate H.263 encoder sample in IPP v4.0. If you find it useful you can submit this as a feature request through the Intel Premier Support service.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;What about performance degradation when you were using static merged libraries - it seems for me that you did not call ippStaticInit/ippStaticFree functions, they are needed to initialize static dispatcher. Without it dispatcher will select generic PX code.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;BR /&gt; Vladimir&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2004 23:14:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/IPP-v4-G-729-Sample-Question/m-p/961563#M19720</guid>
      <dc:creator>Intel_C_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-04-28T23:14:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

