Paper detail

A figure of merit for describing the performance of scaling of parallelization

With the spread of multi- and many-core processors more and more typical task is to re-implement some source code written originally for a single processor to run on more than one cores. Since it is a serious investment, it is important to decide how much efforts pays off, and whether the resulting implementation has as good performability as it could be. The Amdahl's law provides some theoretical upper limits for the performance gain reachable through parallelizing the code, but it needs the detailed architectural knowledge of the program code, does not consider the housekeeping activity needed for parallelization and cannot tell how the actual stage of parallelization implementation performs. The present paper suggests a quantitative measure for that goal. This figure of merit is derived experimentally, from measured running time, and number of threads/cores. It can be used to quantify the used parallelization technology, the connection between the computing units, the acceleration technology under the given conditions, communication method within SoC, or the performance of the software team/compiler.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.