libjpeg8c vs libjpeg-turbo with libjpeg8 compat on
doko at ubuntu.com
Thu Oct 27 09:38:01 UTC 2011
On 10/26/2011 10:54 PM, Tom Gall wrote:
> In prep for Linaro Connect & the Ubuntu Developers Summit next week
> I've put together some performance measurements comparing libjpeg8c
> and libjpeg-turbo compiled with it's libjpeg8 compatibility setting.
> Quality settings of 95 and 75 are used. Image sizes used are 640x480
> and 3136x2352.
> Hardware used includes the imx53 QuickStart board by freescale and an
> intel core 2 duo in my Lenovo T400.
> The results can be found here including both the raw numbers and pretty graphs.
> It is my hope that at LC/UDS we will be able to use these numbers to
> convince ubuntu to reconsider it's switch to libjpeg8 and instead move
> to libjpeg-turbo. The 2x-4x across the board performance improvement
> story is compelling not to mention the technical side of it as well.
I doubt that Ubuntu will reconsider this for Precise, but I see that you did
schedule a session for UDS/Connect . It would be good, if you could provide
relevant information for the session:
- performance data from your wiki in a precise/12.04 environment,
not just for arm, but for all supported Ubuntu architectures.
Performance data from a natty environment doesn't really help.
How does this compare to a libjpeg8 targeted to newer CPUs?
Such a library could be used via hwcap.
- A test rebuild for packages build-depending on libjpeg*-dev.
Not sure if this will catch all issues, but it's a start.
That should give an estimate for sourceful and sourceless
changes needed, and for which packages you'll have to
maintain a delta compared to Debian.
More information about the linaro-dev