<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Performance Difference Between Custom AVX Addition and IPP Add Function on Large Arrays in Intel® Integrated Performance Primitives</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Performance-Difference-Between-Custom-AVX-Addition-and-IPP-Add/m-p/1693298#M29099</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Dear Intel Support,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I implemented a basic element-wise addition function using a manual for loop and AVX2 intrinsics. I compiled my code with optimization level -O3 and compared its performance with Intel IPP’s ippsAdd_32f function.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For small array sizes, both implementations show similar performance. However, for larger arrays, the IPP function performs significantly better. Initially, I thought this was due to better cache utilization and pipelining, but since I am already compiling with -O3, I wonder if there are additional techniques involved on the IPP side.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Could you please clarify whether IPP uses further optimizations, such as cache-aware tiling, software prefetching, or multi-threading with Intel TBB or other libraries?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you in advance.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards,&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2025 07:10:18 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>mehmetDincer</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-05-29T07:10:18Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Performance Difference Between Custom AVX Addition and IPP Add Function on Large Arrays</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Performance-Difference-Between-Custom-AVX-Addition-and-IPP-Add/m-p/1693298#M29099</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Dear Intel Support,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I implemented a basic element-wise addition function using a manual for loop and AVX2 intrinsics. I compiled my code with optimization level -O3 and compared its performance with Intel IPP’s ippsAdd_32f function.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For small array sizes, both implementations show similar performance. However, for larger arrays, the IPP function performs significantly better. Initially, I thought this was due to better cache utilization and pipelining, but since I am already compiling with -O3, I wonder if there are additional techniques involved on the IPP side.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Could you please clarify whether IPP uses further optimizations, such as cache-aware tiling, software prefetching, or multi-threading with Intel TBB or other libraries?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you in advance.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards,&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2025 07:10:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Performance-Difference-Between-Custom-AVX-Addition-and-IPP-Add/m-p/1693298#M29099</guid>
      <dc:creator>mehmetDincer</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-05-29T07:10:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance Difference Between Custom AVX Addition and IPP Add Function on Large Arrays</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Performance-Difference-Between-Custom-AVX-Addition-and-IPP-Add/m-p/1694547#M29100</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If your hand-written AVX2 addition code is well written, it can already fully utilize the SIMD capabilities of the CPU.&amp;nbsp;IPP has limited room for optimization for small data sizes.&amp;nbsp;Also, for small data sizes, the overhead of calling IPP functions (such as parameter checking and scheduling logic) may offset the advantages of its optimization.&lt;BR /&gt;IPP uses advanced optimization techniques such as loop unrolling, software pipelining, cache blocking, etc.&amp;nbsp;These optimizations work well when the data size is large because they require a sufficient number of iterations to amortize the overhead. IPP internally doesn't use TBB or other threading libraries. While uses do benefit from tiling and threading technology.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Here is one article for your reference&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/docs/ipp/developer-reference-integration-wrapper/2020/tiling-and-threading.html" target="_blank"&gt;Tiling and Threading&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Ruqiu&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 02:34:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Integrated-Performance/Performance-Difference-Between-Custom-AVX-Addition-and-IPP-Add/m-p/1694547#M29100</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ruqiu_C_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-04T02:34:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

