0

I'm trying to improve surf.cpp parallel performance, and according to my analysis, a lot of time is spent at line 697:

// Scale the window to size PATCH_SZ so each pixel's size is s. This
// makes calculating the gradients with wavelets of size 2s easy
resize(win, _patch, _patch.size(), 0, 0, INTER_AREA);

Where Mat win(win_size, win_size, CV_8U, winbuf);

I never used Intel Integrated Perfomance Primitives (IPP), but from my understanding usually has better performance than OpenCV. I've seen here that you can use it to resize an image, what is the equivalent command above using IPP?

justHelloWorld
  • 6,478
  • 8
  • 58
  • 138
  • 1
    did you compile openCV with IPP? – Micka Feb 22 '17 at 13:15
  • I think I did using the version provided by opencv itself – justHelloWorld Feb 22 '17 at 14:04
  • compile it yourself with IPP support! It will probably give you a nice speedup. – Micka Feb 22 '17 at 14:50
  • @Micka thanks for your answer, but by defualt will use its own provided version of IPP, right? In that case I'm already using IPP and the `cv::resize` function seems inefficient! Besides, how do I understand if `cv::resize` is implemented using IPP? – justHelloWorld Feb 22 '17 at 17:51
  • no, default doesn't use IPP, because it has different license or sth. – Micka Feb 22 '17 at 21:00
  • with getBuildInformation() you can print the compilation stuff used in your library. http://docs.opencv.org/modules/core/doc/utility_and_system_functions_and_macros.html#const%20std%3a%3astring&%20getBuildInformation%28%29 – Micka Feb 22 '17 at 21:12
  • @Micka you're the most expert guy that I know about OpenCV here, **please** could you help me [here](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/43759869/is-there-any-opencv-or-ipp-equivalent-for-this-function)? I'm struggling – justHelloWorld May 03 '17 at 19:27

0 Answers0