3 ms·
There is, actually, one single instance I can think of where a custom memcpy would be better for an audio player than the compiler-provided memcpy. Some time ag
by Asooka 10y ago
There is, actually, one single instance I can think of where a custom memcpy would be better for an audio player than the compiler-provided memcpy. Some time ago Intel engineers advised that you should memcpy backwards on certain CPUs because it ended up being slightly faster. If you're copying a large enough buffer and running with tight enough latency (not sure how that would happen though), there's the very slight possibility that you might end up not copying the first new expected sample in time.
- Dylan16807 10y agoI think you're trying too hard to apply that interesting fact to the situation at hand. Audio bitrates are just not high enough to need it. And avoiding skipping generally means getting the first few bytes into the buffer fast enough, so starting at the other end would make it worse.