> Try to do the pointer access with the simple "res +=
array[ti][tj] ;&quot;<br />&gt; instruction.<br />The results from my
earlier post was from this. The res = uni() is not the core of the
computation, just the array initialisation :) The greater the computation,
the smaller the overhead will be IMHO. For a computation like<br /><br
/>res + = array[i][j]*cos(array[i][j]) <br />versus its while( begin++)
equivalent, the overhead is never greater than 1%<br /><br />&gt; In a
program where I use much images and arrays the real gain was<br />&gt;
switching few functions to handwritten assembler code. 6 times faster
than<br />&gt; an already good c++ algorithm. All the rest of the
application is standard<br />&gt; elegant and &quot;slow&quot; code. But
it doesn't impact the overall performance.<br /><br />I perfectly agree
but I think that in most case, going down that low level is not needed,
vene in image processing. i would rather take a few minutes to SIMDify a
code if possible than rewriting it in inline assembly.<br /><br />Anyway,
I'm onto writing this small multi_array with indexing to see how it fares.