Revision history [back]

When comparing speed of combinations of feature detectors and descriptors i realised that matching SURF features using the L2 norm is notably faster than matching BRIEF features using the hamming distance. I figured I must've done something wrong as the BRIEF paper claims the hamming distance being much faster to compute than the L2 norm - but i can not figure out what I've done wrong in that case!

(The speed is calculated using chrono and divided / features found)

Or is it correct behaviour? Or does the implementation (or compilation?) not utilise native xor instructions? Any ideas?

When comparing speed of combinations of feature detectors and descriptors i realised that matching SURF features using the L2 norm is notably faster than matching BRIEF features using the hamming distance. I figured I must've done something wrong as the BRIEF paper claims the hamming distance being much faster to compute than the L2 norm - but i can not figure out what I've done wrong in that case!

(The speed is calculated using chrono and divided / by features found)

Or is it correct behaviour? Or does the implementation (or compilation?) not utilise native xor instructions? Any ideas?

When comparing speed of combinations of feature detectors and descriptors i realised that matching SURF features using the L2 norm is notably faster than matching BRIEF features using the hamming distance. I figured I must've done something wrong as the BRIEF paper claims the hamming distance being much faster to compute than the L2 norm - but i can not figure out what I've done wrong in that case!

(The speed is calculated using chrono and divided by features found)

Or is it correct behaviour? Or does the implementation (or compilation?) not utilise native xor instructions? Any ideas?

When comparing speed of combinations of feature detectors and descriptors i realised that matching SURF features using the L2 norm is notably faster than matching BRIEF features using the hamming distance. I figured I must've done something wrong as the BRIEF paper claims the hamming distance being much faster to compute than the L2 norm - but i can not figure out what I've done wrong in that case!

(The speed is calculated using chrono and divided by features found)

Or is it correct behaviour? Or does the implementation (or compilation?) not utilise native xor instructions? Any ideas?

EDIT: So i dug around in the source code and it seams like L2 is optimised with SSE while hamming is not. Am I correct correct? Could that explain the results?