Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
20th February 2008, 04:02 | #141 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne, AU
Posts: 1,963
|
http://avisynth2.cvs.sourceforge.net...rev=Avisynth64
Avisynth.h lives under \core. I haven't been able to work on the main code for a long time. |
22nd February 2008, 01:41 | #142 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 11
|
Mt
Quote:
Any plans to port the MT plugin over to 64bit? My AMD X2 3800+ can't keep up |
|
23rd February 2008, 00:42 | #143 | Link |
easily bamboozled user
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 373
|
squid_80: Thanks so much for taking the time to compile all this stuff for us! I have no idea how long it takes you to recompile someone else's project, but I'm wondering if you plan to do the latest version of DGDecode (1.4.9), since the version on your site is 1.4.6? I'm only asking because I'd like to take advantage of the improvements in DGIndex 1.4.9 in the near future.
Also, for what it's worth, here's some filters that I always use. Not meaning to sound demanding, just putting these out there as suggestions for when you've got time to recompile more filters: FluxSmooth Unfilter RemoveGrain (it's got an SSE3 implementation with a mode that's meant to replace Undot) MSharpen I really wish I could help you out with recompiling old stuff to 64-bit, but the best compiler I've got on my computer is the first version of VS .NET. It's probably of no use for making optimized 64-bit builds. |
23rd February 2008, 06:15 | #144 | Link |
Avisynth Developer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,167
|
The big drawback with the 64 bit implementations is you have to loose all the inline assembler code. Many filters don't have C or C++ versions of their algorithm, and for those that do they are usually orders of magnitude slower than the inline assembler version.
Ask Squid, it is anything but trivial to port inline assember into a form usable in the 64 bit environment. Inline assemblers greatest attraction is you can write all the use once frilly code in C++ then you get to do raw inner meat in assembler complete with still being able to reference all the C++ variables. Remember MMX code is already 64bit and SSE2 is 128bit. Porting the frilly code to 64 bit effectivly gains you nothing. Note! I am not saying writing fresh in 64bit gains you nothing, hell for a start you get twice as many registers, I am just saying porting to 64 bit is a pain. Blame Micro$oft they chose to remove the inline assembler feature from their 64bit compiler. |
24th February 2008, 09:15 | #145 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne, AU
Posts: 1,963
|
Intel's compiler does support inline assembly, that's how I was able to do tdeint, masktools, clouded's motion.dll and awarpsharp in quick succession (although awarpsharp took extra work since it has no source code!). Unfortunately my version is old and won't integrate with VS2005 so I have to do everything from the command line.
After 2.6 gets released I planned to do a proper build of the core with all built-in functions included using ICC. I know it's not nice having code that can only be compiled by a certain (expensive) compiler but I consider that MS's fault, not mine. |
26th February 2008, 20:38 | #146 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 11
|
custom build rules
What about using custom build rules to integrate into VS2005 similar to how YASM integrates?
also, could you put mt_masktools and fft3dfilter on your list to do? (It's for my vista media center http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=719041) BTW, you know when's 2.6 coming out? |
27th February 2008, 23:21 | #148 | Link | |
ffdshow/AviSynth wrangler
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Austria
Posts: 2,441
|
Quote:
Or did you mean that Windows XP 64bit still exists as an upgrade choice for Vista 64bit? np: Autechre - IO (Quaristice)
__________________
now playing: [artist] - [track] ([album]) |
|
29th February 2008, 04:16 | #150 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 11
|
Quote:
anyhow... One question, does 32bit vista running on a 64bit processor allow 64bit data manipulation, or is it moot since optimized code would usually just use the MMX/SSEx (64/128bit) registers? Last edited by XBoy; 29th February 2008 at 04:19. |
|
29th February 2008, 15:10 | #151 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne, AU
Posts: 1,963
|
It's mainly moot (ok that sounds odd) because SIMD (single instruction multiple data i.e MMX/SSE) code can already do 64/128 bits processing, but:
- 64-bit mode has 8 more SSE registers - 64-bit mode has 8 more general purpose registers which can be helpful in SIMD loops which use many pointers/counters - for x32 non-SIMD code, 64bit data manipulation is still possible (with C/C++ at least, using the __int64 type) but two 32-bit registers are used. Typically this means 2-3 times as many instructions as the same operation performed in 64-bit mode. Also because the general purpose registers are larger it's possible to do tricks like horizontal adding via multiply that weren't possible before. |
3rd March 2008, 18:56 | #152 | Link | |||
easily bamboozled user
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 373
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
3rd March 2008, 19:44 | #153 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne, AU
Posts: 1,963
|
I will do fluxsmooth if you promise to give me feedback on whether it works properly or not.
Edit: FluxSmooth thread has version 1.1b available but I can only find source code for 1.1a. Anyone have it? Last edited by squid_80; 3rd March 2008 at 19:53. |
5th March 2008, 05:21 | #154 | Link | ||
easily bamboozled user
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 373
|
Quote:
The assembly won't take advantage of the added registers, sure, but it's a hell of a lot better than nothing; since the asm algorithms using MMX/SSE tend to already do things impossible through C/C++ code without using VC/ICL-specific mnemonics. Quote:
|
||
5th March 2008, 05:27 | #155 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne, AU
Posts: 1,963
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
31st March 2008, 15:45 | #156 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Viersen, Germany
Posts: 270
|
Just to let you know...
since there is no localization for WinXP 64bit it is a big pain for non-english version users to work with it. A lot of directories are different and some software even denies installation on those "MUI"-Versions. WinXP 32bit is a damn great OS, I know. But WinXP64bit is no alternative to Vista64bit! And as much as I can tell....vista runs surprisingly round and smooth on my system. |
3rd April 2008, 17:18 | #157 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 5
|
Quote:
|
|
2nd May 2008, 20:36 | #160 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 11
|
I'm trying to compile the version here: http://avisynth2.cvs.sourceforge.net...rev=Avisynth64
but I'm running into some missing links: avisynth.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "struct AVSFunction * Levels_filters" (?Levels_filters@@3PAUAVSFunction@@A) Where are these? Also, where's the directshow dll portion? Last edited by XBoy; 2nd May 2008 at 21:31. |
|
|