Types of optimized implementations

Skip to first unread message

Seongkwang Kim

Nov 15, 2023, 8:49:51 PM11/15/23
to KpqC-bulletin
Dear all,

We want to hear your opinion about how much the code should be optimized.
Focusing on PC (not embedded devices), we think AVX2 implementation is a de-facto standard of optimization level.
But there are more options such as portable C (with optimization), and AVX512.

Is it necessary to implement optimized C version beyond reference implementation?
Any opinions on AVX512 are also welcome (e.g., industrial necessity, availability).

I think the consensus on this type of discussion will ease the performance comparison.

Best regards,
Seongkwang Kim

Hwajeong Seo

Nov 16, 2023, 2:32:29 AM11/16/23
to KpqC-bulletin
Dear Dr. Kim,

Many benchmarks on various platforms are always welcome for the competition but it is not realistic setting.

In this case, we need to focus on limited environments.

In my opinion, for the round 2, the portable C(w/ optimization) or AVX should be considered.

However, the preparing the codes within 2~3 months is challenging issue. 

If it is possible, the submission of algorithm specification is following the original schedule 
and the submission of implementation is delayed by May or June (i.e. specification and implementation are submitted, separately). 

Second, the  AVX implementation is more difficult than C(w/ optimization) so AVX implementation should be optional.

In conclusion, I think the portable C(w/ optimization) should be submitted after round 2 submission and AVX implementation should be optional.

Thank you.

2023년 11월 16일 목요일 오전 10시 49분 51초 UTC+9에 Seongkwang Kim님이 작성:
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages