https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/In-place-FFTs-and-VTune/m-p/875576#M9461 <P>Hi Dave,</P> <P>the magic is in less memory load forin-place operation.</P> <P>Regards,<BR /> Vladimir</P> Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:59:47 GMT Vladimir_Dudnik 2008-06-11T12:59:47Z https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/In-place-FFTs-and-VTune/m-p/875575#M9460 I am currently using in-place FFTs but in VTune it appears that the in-place functions call the out-of-place functions. Consequently, for large sizes the perftool indicates that using in-place FFTs is more efficient. I am using sizes 512K-4M. How can one be more efficient than the other if one calls the other??<BR /><BR />Dave<BR /> Tue, 10 Jun 2008 23:07:39 GMT https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/In-place-FFTs-and-VTune/m-p/875575#M9460 dave4 2008-06-10T23:07:39Z https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/In-place-FFTs-and-VTune/m-p/875576#M9461 <P>Hi Dave,</P> <P>the magic is in less memory load forin-place operation.</P> <P>Regards,<BR /> Vladimir</P> Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:59:47 GMT https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/In-place-FFTs-and-VTune/m-p/875576#M9461 Vladimir_Dudnik 2008-06-11T12:59:47Z