Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A Comparison of Different Parallel Programming Models for Multicore Processors
KTH, School of Information and Communication Technology (ICT).
2010 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (professional degree), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

As computers are used in most areas today improving their performance is of great importance. Until recently a faster processor was the main contributor to the increase of overall computer speed. Today the situation has changed as heating is becoming a bigger problem. Running a processor faster requires more power which also leads to the processor's components getting warmer. A solution to this is to use several somewhat slower processors in the same computer, so called multiprocessor or multicore processor. That way programs can execute on different processors, or functionality of one program can be divided and run on several processors simultaneously.

Programming for multicore architectures is however more complex than programming for computers with a single processor, as data in the memory now can be accessed by several instances, called threads, of a program at the same time. This calls for some kind of synchronization between such threads.

Many different models are available to simplify the implementation procedure of programs for multicore computers, and such models are compared in this thesis. The models in question are Pthreads, OpenMP and Cilk++.

The models differ from each other in many ways, and are found to be useful for different areas. While Pthreads is a good tool when one wants to expose the threading mechanisms and be sure to have high exibility, OpenMP and Cilk++ offer simpler interfaces. OpenMP's main strengths are its interface and good portability. Cilk++ is suitable when high performance is the most important aspect.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. , p. 56
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-26320OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-26320DiVA, id: diva2:371746
Uppsok
Technology
Examiners
Available from: 2010-11-22 Created: 2010-11-22 Last updated: 2010-11-22Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(480 kB)650 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 480 kBChecksum SHA-512
bf62af3a22056b69c6338047a920489fd3f0fa0b531957cf0971e5b4e50d8d846f1bed438f2391eed8fb77bd9da9f86a3c8b1a6bbe27cceedbc064f36d3605cd
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
School of Information and Communication Technology (ICT)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 650 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 304 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf