> I'm not up-to-date on benchmarks so I cant comment, but just to > clarify the denormal thing in P4's is not a bug, its how you handle > denormals, the only difference is that the P4 takes longer to handle > them so you get away with it less often. > > Ideally DSP software would be written so that it never generates them, > but, erm, well, developers are lazy, y'know :) sure, denormals are not a bug, but the behaviour on dsp systems that aren't denormal-save is similar to a bug ;-) > On the P4 its possible that you can set some flags to use SSE > instructions instead of 387 and tell the SSE unit to never produce > denormals, but last time I tried it, gcc 3.something generated bad > code (illegal instructions). wait ... you imply that the sse unit doesn't produce denormals, so that a -march=sse _should_ solve all dsp user problems? i heard that gcc 3.2 produces illegal instructions, but that it's solved in gcc 3.3 ... can anyone confirm / deny this? cheers... Tim mailto:TimBlechmann@xxxxxx ICQ: 96771783 -- The only people for me are the mad ones, the ones who are mad to live, mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time, the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn, like fabulous yellow roman candles exploding like spiders across the stars and in the middle you see the blue centerlight pop and everybody goes "Awww!" Jack Kerouac
