Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.

Showing results for

- Intel Community
- Software Development SDKs and Libraries
- Intel® Integrated Performance Primitives
- deprecated Functions:ippsTone_Direct_32f and ippsr_Sinc_32f

- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Printer Friendly Page

Highlighted
##

rohitspandey

Beginner

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

08-28-2013
04:23 AM

22 Views

deprecated Functions:ippsTone_Direct_32f and ippsr_Sinc_32f

Hi,

Alot many functions like ippsTone_Direct_32f/sinc etc are deprecated. Is there any replacement function for them? We use ippsTone_Direct_xx and ippsr_sinc alot in our application. Is ot possible to include them in sp library and not deprecated.

If not, them is the combination of slope/ramp function wit ipps_sin/ipps_cos is faster in execution. We need faster replacement for these API. Kindly suggest if IPP sin/cos is faster compared to tone. How the ipps_cos/sin implemented.

Regards

Rohit

5 Replies

Highlighted
##

>>...Kindly suggest if IPP sin/cos is faster compared to tone. **How the ipps_cos/sin implemented**...
That was already explained many times on different IDZ forums that Intel does not release any details on how some API is implemented or what algorithms are used.
With regard to deprecated functions: Please consider to make a feedback on usage of functions you need at:
.
http://software.intel.com/sites/products/ipp-deprecated-features-feedback.
Thanks in advance.

SKost

Valued Contributor II

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

08-28-2013
06:08 AM

22 Views

Highlighted
##

rohitspandey

Beginner

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

08-28-2013
06:13 AM

22 Views

Hi,

ok, but can you shed some input on the speed of execution of IPP sin/cos when compared to direct tone?

Regards

Rohit

Highlighted
##

There are several IPP functions from **Vector Math** domain:
...
IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAcos_32f_A11, (const Ipp32f a[],Ipp32f r[],Ipp32s n))
IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAcos_32f_A21, (const Ipp32f a[],Ipp32f r[],Ipp32s n))
IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAcos_32f_A24, (const Ipp32f a[],Ipp32f r[],Ipp32s n))
IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAcos_64f_A26, (const Ipp64f a[],Ipp64f r[],Ipp32s n))
IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAcos_64f_A50, (const Ipp64f a[],Ipp64f r[],Ipp32s n))
IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAcos_64f_A53, (const Ipp64f a[],Ipp64f r[],Ipp32s n))
IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAsin_32f_A11, (const Ipp32f a[],Ipp32f r[],Ipp32s n))
IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAsin_32f_A21, (const Ipp32f a[],Ipp32f r[],Ipp32s n))
IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAsin_32f_A24, (const Ipp32f a[],Ipp32f r[],Ipp32s n))
IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAsin_64f_A26, (const Ipp64f a[],Ipp64f r[],Ipp32s n))
IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAsin_64f_A50, (const Ipp64f a[],Ipp64f r[],Ipp32s n))
IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAsin_64f_A53, (const Ipp64f a[],Ipp64f r[],Ipp32s n))
...
and performance is related to a precision ( Axx suffix ). It is Not clear what precision do you need in case of '_32f_' functions?

SKost

Valued Contributor II

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

08-28-2013
06:46 AM

22 Views

Highlighted
##

rohitspandey

Beginner

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

08-29-2013
01:27 AM

22 Views

Hi,

Following are the function we would be using in our application to replace (IppStatus ippsTone_Direct_32fc(Ipp32fc* pDst, int len, float magn, float rFreq, float* pPhase, IppHintAlgorithmhint); and IppStatus ippsTone_Direct_64fc(Ipp64fc* pDst, int len, double magn, double rFreq, double* pPhase, IppHintAlgorithmhint);

IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAcos_32f_A24, (const Ipp32f a[],Ipp32f r[],Ipp32s n))

IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAcos_64f_A53, (const Ipp64f a[],Ipp64f r[],Ipp32s n))

IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAsin_64f_A53, (const Ipp64f a[],Ipp64f r[],Ipp32s n))

IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAsin_32f_A24, (const Ipp32f a[],Ipp32f r[],Ipp32s n))

Can you now tell me if these functions are slower or faster on a intel i5and i7 platform.We would limit to SSE2 support only.

Regards

Rohit

Highlighted
##

>>IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAcos_32f_A24, (const Ipp32f a[],Ipp32f r[],Ipp32s n))
>>
>>IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAcos_64f_A53, (const Ipp64f a[],Ipp64f r[],Ipp32s n))
>>
>>IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAsin_64f_A53, (const Ipp64f a[],Ipp64f r[],Ipp32s n))
>>
>>IPPAPI( IppStatus, ippsAsin_32f_A24, (const Ipp32f a[],Ipp32f r[],Ipp32s n))
Even if these vectorized IPP functions are faster, compared to ippsTone_Direct_32fc, I don't think that it will be a right comparison. Single-precision functions are always faster then double-precision and these vectorized functions just calculate sines or cosines. ippsTone_Direct_32fc does more and it can not be faster. All these functions are very easy to use and you need to create a simple test-case to get exact performance numbers on computer systems you use.

SKost

Valued Contributor II

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

08-29-2013
05:49 AM

22 Views

For more complete information about compiler optimizations, see our Optimization Notice.