Justin Schoeman wrote: (regarding RGB/YUV conversion) > > I actually benchmarked these two versions a while ago, and it turns out > that on a reasonably new PC (K6/PII or up), fixed point arithmetic is > quite a bit faster than tables - It turns out that a fixed point > multiply is a lot quicker than a memory access (especially when taking > the heavy cache usage of image processing into account). On older PCs > (Pentium/K5/etc) the table version is quicker. Justin, do you remember if this difference would show in a simple conversion loop benchmark, or did it have to be in context of an actual image conversion with corresponding cache usage? Ben
