3 ms·
The 2.5 cycles/byte compared to the 32 cycles/byte that Intel managed pulled off seems like an improbably large improvement over the current state of the art? I
by MrBuddyCasino 8y ago
The 2.5 cycles/byte compared to the 32 cycles/byte that Intel managed pulled off seems like an improbably large improvement over the current state of the art? Is this real?
- Ono-Sendai 8y agoWell, that's for a very small and particular size. (1024 elements) Intel's library might have more overhead at that size.
- bdukic 8y agoMy guess is that the "catch" comes in the form of the list of limitations.
- Cyphase 8y agoThe cycles/byte for all the sizes listed in the table on the Speed page[0], courtesy of copy-paste and a one-liner in the Python REPL: size cycles/byte (based on median) 1 6.0 2 3.375 4 11.625 8 9.625 16 7.984375 32 7.515625 64 6.0390625 128 4.31640625 256 2.4873046875 512 2.29443359375 1024 2.5048828125 2048 2.77893066406 4096 3.0791015625 8192 3.89566040039 16384 5.23690795898 32768 6.35472106934 65536 7.55914306641 131072 9.23189163208 262144 10.789557457 524288 12.4885950089 1048576 14.6550707817 [0] https://sorting.cr.yp.to/speed.html https://sorting.cr.yp.to/speed.html