比较不同CPU下的分支预测

发表于 更新于 分类于 阅读次数：

比较不同CPU下的分支预测

目的

本文通过一段对分支预测是否友好的代码来验证 branch load miss 差异，已经最终带来的 性能差异。同时在x86和aarch64 下各选几款CPU共7款进行差异性对比

CPU 情况

CPU 一览表

CPU 架构 微架构 年份 制程 测试环境核数 主频 L1d L1i L2 L3
Intel 8163 x86 Skylake-SP 2017 14nm 48 (24C×2S) 2.5GHz 32K 32K 1024K 33792K
Hygon 7260 x86 Zen 1 (OEM) 2019 14nm 48 (24C×2S) 2.2GHz 32K 64K 512K 8192K
鲲鹏920 ARM v8 TaiShan v110 2019 7nm 96 (48C×2S) 2.6GHz 64K 64K 512K 24576K
ARM M710 ARM v9 Neoverse V1 2022 5nm 128 (128C×1S) 2.75GHz 64K 64K 1024K 65536K
FT S2500 ARM v8 FTC663 2021 16nm 128 (64C×2S) 2.1GHz 32K 32K 2048K 65536K
Intel 6982P-C x86 Granite Rapids 2024 Intel 3 16 (8C×1S, HT) 3.8GHz 48K 64K 2048K 516096K
AMD 9T25 x86 Zen 5 (Turin) 2024 TSMC 3/4nm 16 (8C×1S, SMT) 3.8GHz 48K 32K 1024K 32768K

后两款 CPU 在阿里云 ECS 第九代机型上测试（ecs.g9i.4xlarge / ecs.g9a.4xlarge），2026-08-31 实测。

Intel 8163 (Skylake-SP, 2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
#lscpu
Architecture:          x86_64
CPU op-mode(s):        32-bit, 64-bit
Byte Order:            Little Endian
CPU(s):                48
On-line CPU(s) list:   0-47
Thread(s) per core:    1
Core(s) per socket:    24
Socket(s):             2
NUMA node(s):          2
Vendor ID:             GenuineIntel
CPU family:            6
Model:                 85
Model name:            Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8163 CPU @ 2.50GHz
Stepping:              4
CPU MHz:               2500.195
CPU max MHz:           3100.0000
CPU min MHz:           1000.0000
BogoMIPS:              4998.89
Virtualization:        VT-x
L1d cache:             32K
L1i cache:             32K
L2 cache:              1024K
L3 cache:              33792K
NUMA node0 CPU(s):     0-23
NUMA node1 CPU(s):     24-47
Flags:                 fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc aperfmperf eagerfpu pni pclmulqdq dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 fma cx16 xtpr pdcm pcid dca sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic movbe popcnt tsc_deadline_timer aes xsave avx f16c rdrand lahf_lm abm 3dnowprefetch ida arat epb invpcid_single pln pts dtherm spec_ctrl ibpb_support tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept vpid fsgsbase tsc_adjust bmi1 hle avx2 smep bmi2 erms invpcid rtm cqm mpx rdt avx512f avx512dq rdseed adx smap clflushopt avx512cd avx512bw avx512vl xsaveopt xsavec xgetbv1 cqm_llc cqm_occup_llc cqm_mbm_total cqm_mbm_local cat_l3 mba

Hygon 7260 (Zen 1 OEM, 2019)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
#lscpu
Architecture:        x86_64
CPU op-mode(s):      32-bit, 64-bit
Byte Order:          Little Endian
Address sizes:       43 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
CPU(s):              48
On-line CPU(s) list: 0-47
Thread(s) per core:  1
Core(s) per socket:  24
Socket(s):           2
NUMA node(s):        8
Vendor ID:           HygonGenuine
CPU family:          24
Model:               1
Model name:          Hygon C86 7260 24-core Processor
Stepping:            1
Frequency boost:     enabled
CPU MHz:             1069.534
CPU max MHz:         2200.0000
CPU min MHz:         1200.0000
BogoMIPS:            4399.38
Virtualization:      AMD-V
L1d cache:           32K
L1i cache:           64K
L2 cache:            512K
L3 cache:            8192K
NUMA node0 CPU(s):   0-5
NUMA node1 CPU(s):   6-11
NUMA node2 CPU(s):   12-17
NUMA node3 CPU(s):   18-23
NUMA node4 CPU(s):   24-29
NUMA node5 CPU(s):   30-35
NUMA node6 CPU(s):   36-41
NUMA node7 CPU(s):   42-47

ARM 鲲鹏920 (TaiShan v110, 2019)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
#lscpu
Architecture:          aarch64
Byte Order:            Little Endian
CPU(s):                96
On-line CPU(s) list:   0-95
Thread(s) per core:    1
Core(s) per socket:    48
Socket(s):             2
NUMA node(s):          4
Model:                 0
CPU max MHz:           2600.0000
CPU min MHz:           200.0000
BogoMIPS:              200.00
L1d cache:             64K
L1i cache:             64K
L2 cache:              512K
L3 cache:              24576K
NUMA node0 CPU(s):     0-23
NUMA node1 CPU(s):     24-47
NUMA node2 CPU(s):     48-71
NUMA node3 CPU(s):     72-95
Flags:                 fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fphp asimdhp cpuid asimdrdm jscvt fcma dcpop asimddp asimdfhm

ARM M710 (Neoverse V1, 2022)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
#lscpu
Architecture:          aarch64
Byte Order:            Little Endian
CPU(s):                128
On-line CPU(s) list:   0-127
Thread(s) per core:    1
Core(s) per socket:    128
Socket(s):             1
NUMA node(s):          2
Model:                 0
BogoMIPS:              100.00
L1d cache:             64K
L1i cache:             64K
L2 cache:              1024K
L3 cache:              65536K
NUMA node0 CPU(s):     0-63
NUMA node1 CPU(s):     64-127
Flags:                 fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics fphp asimdhp cpuid asimdrdm jscvt fcma lrcpc dcpop sha3 sm3 sm4 asimddp sha512 sve asimdfhm dit uscat ilrcpc flagm ssbs sb dcpodp sve2 sveaes svepmull svebitperm svesha3 svesm4 flagm2 frint svei8mm svebf16 i8mm bf16 dgh

ARM FT S2500 (FTC663, 2021)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
#lscpu
Architecture:          aarch64
Byte Order:            Little Endian
CPU(s):                128
On-line CPU(s) list:   0-127
Thread(s) per core:    1
Core(s) per socket:    64
Socket(s):             2
NUMA node(s):          16
Model:                 3
BogoMIPS:              100.00
L1d cache:             32K
L1i cache:             32K
L2 cache:              2048K
L3 cache:              65536K
NUMA node0 CPU(s):     0-7
NUMA node1 CPU(s):     8-15
NUMA node2 CPU(s):     16-23
NUMA node3 CPU(s):     24-31
NUMA node4 CPU(s):     32-39
NUMA node5 CPU(s):     40-47
NUMA node6 CPU(s):     48-55
NUMA node7 CPU(s):     56-63
NUMA node8 CPU(s):     64-71
NUMA node9 CPU(s):     72-79
NUMA node10 CPU(s):    80-87
NUMA node11 CPU(s):    88-95
NUMA node12 CPU(s):    96-103
NUMA node13 CPU(s):    104-111
NUMA node14 CPU(s):    112-119
NUMA node15 CPU(s):    120-127
Flags:                 fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 cpuid

Intel Xeon 6982P-C (Granite Rapids, 2024)

阿里云 ECS ecs.g9i.4xlarge，16vCPU/64G。实测全核频率 3800MHz。

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
#lscpu
Architecture:        x86_64
CPU op-mode(s):      32-bit, 64-bit
Byte Order:          Little Endian
CPU(s):              16
On-line CPU(s) list: 0-15
Thread(s) per core:  2
Core(s) per socket:  8
Socket(s):           1
NUMA node(s):        1
Vendor ID:           GenuineIntel
BIOS Vendor ID:      Alibaba Cloud
CPU family:          6
Model:               173
Model name:          Intel(R) Xeon(R) 6982P-C
Stepping:            1
CPU MHz:             2800.000
BogoMIPS:            5600.00
Hypervisor vendor:   KVM
Virtualization type: full
L1d cache:           48K
L1i cache:           64K
L2 cache:            2048K
L3 cache:            516096K
NUMA node0 CPU(s):   0-15

AMD EPYC 9T25 (Turin / Zen 5, 2024)

阿里云 ECS ecs.g9a.4xlarge，16vCPU/64G。实测全核频率 ~3804MHz。

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
#lscpu
Architecture:        x86_64
CPU op-mode(s):      32-bit, 64-bit
Byte Order:          Little Endian
CPU(s):              16
On-line CPU(s) list: 0-15
Thread(s) per core:  2
Core(s) per socket:  8
Socket(s):           1
NUMA node(s):        1
Vendor ID:           AuthenticAMD
BIOS Vendor ID:      Alibaba Cloud
CPU family:          26
Model:               2
Model name:          AMD EPYC 9T25 128-Core Processor
Stepping:            0
CPU MHz:             2699.996
BogoMIPS:            5399.99
Hypervisor vendor:   KVM
Virtualization type: full
L1d cache:           48K
L1i cache:           32K
L2 cache:            1024K
L3 cache:            32768K
NUMA node0 CPU(s):   0-15

测试代码

对一个数组中较大的一半的值累加：

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
#include <algorithm>
#include <ctime>
#include <iostream>

int main()
{
    // 随机产生整数，用分区函数填充，以避免出现分桶不均
    const unsigned arraySize = 32768;
    int data[arraySize];

    for (unsigned c = 0; c < arraySize; ++c)
        data[c] = std::rand() % 256;

    //排序后数据有序，CPU可以准确预测到if的分支
    std::sort(data, data + arraySize); //预先排序，也可以注释掉，注释掉表示随机乱序几乎无法预测

    // 测试部分
    clock_t start = clock();
    long long sum = 0;

    for (unsigned i = 0; i < 100000; ++i)
    {
        // 主要计算部分，选一半元素参与计算
        for (unsigned c = 0; c < arraySize; ++c)
        {
            if (data[c] >= 128)
                sum += data[c];
        }
    }

    double elapsedTime = static_cast<double>(clock() - start) / CLOCKS_PER_SEC;

    std::cout << elapsedTime << std::endl;
    std::cout << "sum = " << sum << std::endl;
}

以上代码可以注释掉第15行，也就是不对代码排序直接累加，不排序的话 if (data[c] >= 128) 有50% 概率成立，排序后前一半元素if都不成立，后一半元素if都成立，导致CPU流水线很好预测后面的代码，可以提前加载运算打高IPC

测试结果

aarch64 鲲鹏920

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
#perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,alignment-faults,bpf-output,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-store-misses,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads ./aftersort
11.44
sum = 314931600000

           470,740      branch-misses                                                 (59.99%)
    29,716,627,485      bus-cycles                # 2595.890 M/sec                    (60.03%)
        96,469,435      cache-misses              #    0.420 % of all cache refs      (60.03%)
    22,984,316,728      cache-references          # 2007.791 M/sec                    (60.03%)
    29,716,018,641      cpu-cycles                #    2.596 GHz                      (65.02%)
    83,666,813,837      instructions              #    2.82  insn per cycle
                                                  #    0.10  stalled cycles per insn  (65.02%)
     8,765,807,804      stalled-cycles-backend    #   29.50% backend cycles idle      (65.02%)
         8,917,112      stalled-cycles-frontend   #    0.03% frontend cycles idle     (65.02%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      bpf-output                #    0.000 K/sec
                 5      context-switches          #    0.000 K/sec
         11,447.57 msec cpu-clock                 #    1.000 CPUs utilized
                 0      cpu-migrations            #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               132      minor-faults              #    0.012 K/sec
               132      page-faults               #    0.012 K/sec
         11,447.57 msec task-clock                #    1.000 CPUs utilized
        96,471,779      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    0.42% of all L1-dcache accesses  (65.02%)
    22,985,408,745      L1-dcache-loads           # 2007.886 M/sec                    (65.02%)
        96,472,614      L1-dcache-store-misses    #    8.427 M/sec                    (65.02%)
    22,986,056,706      L1-dcache-stores          # 2007.943 M/sec                    (65.02%)
           184,402      L1-icache-load-misses     #    0.00% of all L1-icache accesses  (65.02%)
    14,779,996,797      L1-icache-loads           # 1291.104 M/sec                    (64.99%)
           330,651      branch-load-misses        #    0.029 M/sec                    (64.96%)
     6,561,353,921      branch-loads              #  573.166 M/sec                    (64.96%)
         3,464,612      dTLB-load-misses          #    0.02% of all dTLB cache accesses  (64.96%)
    23,008,097,187      dTLB-loads                # 2009.868 M/sec                    (59.96%)
               745      iTLB-load-misses          #    0.00% of all iTLB cache accesses  (59.96%)
    14,779,577,851      iTLB-loads                # 1291.067 M/sec                    (59.96%)
    
#perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,alignment-faults,bpf-output,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-store-misses,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads ./beforesort
30.92
sum = 314931600000

     1,639,558,981      branch-misses                                                 (59.96%)
    80,284,783,419      bus-cycles                # 2595.949 M/sec                    (59.96%)
       118,459,436      cache-misses              #    0.356 % of all cache refs      (59.96%)
    33,285,701,200      cache-references          # 1076.269 M/sec                    (59.96%)
    80,283,427,379      cpu-cycles                #    2.596 GHz                      (64.96%)
    83,694,841,472      instructions              #    1.04  insn per cycle
                                                  #    0.11  stalled cycles per insn  (64.98%)
     8,849,746,372      stalled-cycles-backend    #   11.02% backend cycles idle      (64.99%)
     8,064,207,583      stalled-cycles-frontend   #   10.04% frontend cycles idle     (65.00%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      bpf-output                #    0.000 K/sec
                10      context-switches          #    0.000 K/sec
         30,926.95 msec cpu-clock                 #    1.000 CPUs utilized
                 0      cpu-migrations            #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               133      minor-faults              #    0.004 K/sec
               133      page-faults               #    0.004 K/sec
         30,926.95 msec task-clock                #    1.000 CPUs utilized
       118,445,576      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    0.36% of all L1-dcache accesses  (65.02%)
    33,286,586,418      L1-dcache-loads           # 1076.297 M/sec                    (65.03%)
       118,441,599      L1-dcache-store-misses    #    3.830 M/sec                    (65.04%)
    33,286,751,407      L1-dcache-stores          # 1076.302 M/sec                    (65.05%)
           410,040      L1-icache-load-misses     #    0.00% of all L1-icache accesses  (65.05%)
    51,611,031,810      L1-icache-loads           # 1668.805 M/sec                    (65.04%)
     1,639,731,725      branch-load-misses        #   53.020 M/sec                    (65.03%)
     7,520,634,791      branch-loads              #  243.174 M/sec                    (65.02%)
         3,536,061      dTLB-load-misses          #    0.01% of all dTLB cache accesses  (65.00%)
    47,898,134,543      dTLB-loads                # 1548.751 M/sec                    (59.99%)
             2,529      iTLB-load-misses          #    0.00% of all iTLB cache accesses  (59.97%)
    51,612,575,118      iTLB-loads                # 1668.854 M/sec                    (59.96%)

以上在相同CPU下数据对比可以看到核心差异是branch-load-misses和branch-misses，当然最终也体现在 IPC 数值上，排序后IPC更高不是因为数据有序取起来更快，而是因为执行逻辑更容易提前预测，也就是可以提前加载if代码到cache中。符合预期

aarch64 M710

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
#perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,alignment-faults,bpf-output,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,LLC-load-misses,LLC-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads ./aftersort
8.20237
sum = 314931600000

           912,836      branch-misses                                                 (29.86%)
    22,560,165,604      bus-cycles                # 2748.461 M/sec                    (29.91%)
       205,068,961      cache-misses              #    0.892 % of all cache refs      (29.96%)
    22,998,186,284      cache-references          # 2801.824 M/sec                    (30.01%)
    22,559,518,941      cpu-cycles                #    2.748 GHz                      (35.03%)
    77,068,271,833      instructions              #    3.42  insn per cycle
                                                  #    0.06  stalled cycles per insn  (35.08%)
     4,892,933,264      stalled-cycles-backend    #   21.69% backend cycles idle      (35.13%)
     1,103,203,963      stalled-cycles-frontend   #    4.89% frontend cycles idle     (35.13%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      bpf-output                #    0.000 K/sec
                17      context-switches          #    0.002 K/sec
          8,208.29 msec cpu-clock                 #    1.000 CPUs utilized
                 3      cpu-migrations            #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               227      minor-faults              #    0.028 K/sec
               227      page-faults               #    0.028 K/sec
          8,208.30 msec task-clock                #    1.000 CPUs utilized
       205,384,990      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    0.89% of all L1-dcache accesses  (35.13%)
    22,997,494,522      L1-dcache-loads           # 2801.739 M/sec                    (35.13%)
            66,804      L1-icache-load-misses     #    0.00% of all L1-icache accesses  (35.13%)
    15,486,704,750      L1-icache-loads           # 1886.715 M/sec                    (30.12%)
            76,066      LLC-load-misses           #    0.00% of all LL-cache accesses  (30.09%)
                 0      LLC-loads                 #    0.000 K/sec                    (30.03%)
           672,231      branch-load-misses        #    0.082 M/sec                    (29.98%)
     9,844,109,024      branch-loads              # 1199.288 M/sec                    (29.93%)
           107,198      dTLB-load-misses          #    0.00% of all dTLB cache accesses  (29.89%)
    22,998,647,232      dTLB-loads                # 2801.880 M/sec                    (29.84%)
             9,497      iTLB-load-misses          #    0.08% of all iTLB cache accesses  (29.81%)
        11,755,825      iTLB-loads                #    1.432 M/sec                    (29.82%)

       8.210235171 seconds time elapsed

#perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,alignment-faults,bpf-output,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,LLC-load-misses,LLC-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads ./beforesort
16.8872
sum = 314931600000

     1,229,182,485      branch-misses                                                 (29.93%)
    46,401,675,872      bus-cycles                # 2747.200 M/sec                    (29.95%)
       206,116,950      cache-misses              #    0.546 % of all cache refs      (29.97%)
    37,773,036,315      cache-references          # 2236.343 M/sec                    (30.01%)
    46,410,071,081      cpu-cycles                #    2.748 GHz                      (35.03%)
    77,083,625,280      instructions              #    1.66  insn per cycle
                                                  #    0.06  stalled cycles per insn  (35.07%)
     1,961,071,890      stalled-cycles-backend    #    4.23% backend cycles idle      (35.11%)
     4,988,241,014      stalled-cycles-frontend   #   10.75% frontend cycles idle     (35.11%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      bpf-output                #    0.000 K/sec
             1,100      context-switches          #    0.065 K/sec
         16,890.39 msec cpu-clock                 #    0.997 CPUs utilized
                 7      cpu-migrations            #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               229      minor-faults              #    0.014 K/sec
               229      page-faults               #    0.014 K/sec
         16,890.69 msec task-clock                #    0.997 CPUs utilized
       205,761,970      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    0.54% of all L1-dcache accesses  (35.09%)
    37,832,336,945      L1-dcache-loads           # 2239.854 M/sec                    (35.06%)
           207,158      L1-icache-load-misses     #    0.00% of all L1-icache accesses  (35.04%)
    41,944,228,741      L1-icache-loads           # 2483.298 M/sec                    (30.00%)
           135,144      LLC-load-misses           #    0.00% of all LL-cache accesses  (29.97%)
                 0      LLC-loads                 #    0.000 K/sec                    (29.97%)
     1,232,325,180      branch-load-misses        #   72.960 M/sec                    (29.96%)
    14,776,289,690      branch-loads              #  874.827 M/sec                    (29.96%)
           177,790      dTLB-load-misses          #    0.00% of all dTLB cache accesses  (29.97%)
    37,839,288,998      dTLB-loads                # 2240.266 M/sec                    (29.95%)
            46,301      iTLB-load-misses          #    0.00% of all iTLB cache accesses  (29.94%)
    12,631,307,441      iTLB-loads                #  747.833 M/sec                    (29.92%)

      16.943678377 seconds time elapsed

M710上排序与否和鲲鹏差不多，但是 M710比 鲲鹏要快一些，差别只要有主频高一点点(6%)，另外M710编译后的指令数量也略少(8%)。

最大的差别是没有排序的话 branch-load-misses(1,232,325,180)/branch-loads(14,776,289,690) 比例只有鲲鹏的50%，导致整体 IPC 比鲲鹏高不少(1.66 VS 1.04)

如果是排序后的数据来看 M710比鲲鹏好40%，IPC 好了20%，iTLB-loads 差异特别大

aarch64 FT S2500

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
#perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,alignment-faults,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-store-misses,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,iTLB-load-misses ./aftersort
16.63
sum = 314931600000

         1,298,873      branch-misses             #    0.078 M/sec                    (37.49%)
    34,893,306,641      bus-cycles                # 2096.049 M/sec                    (37.51%)
       211,447,452      cache-misses              #    0.913 % of all cache refs      (37.53%)
    23,154,909,673      cache-references          # 1390.921 M/sec                    (37.54%)
    34,891,766,353      cpu-cycles                #    2.096 GHz                      (43.79%)
    83,918,069,835      instructions              #    2.41  insns per cycle          (43.79%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
               102      context-switches          #    0.006 K/sec
      16647.131540      cpu-clock (msec)
                35      cpu-migrations            #    0.002 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               384      minor-faults              #    0.023 K/sec
               384      page-faults               #    0.023 K/sec
      16647.178560      task-clock (msec)         #    1.000 CPUs utilized
       211,277,069      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    0.91% of all L1-dcache hits    (43.79%)
    23,168,806,437      L1-dcache-loads           # 1391.756 M/sec                    (43.77%)
       211,376,611      L1-dcache-store-misses    #   12.697 M/sec                    (43.75%)
    23,172,492,978      L1-dcache-stores          # 1391.977 M/sec                    (43.73%)
         6,060,438      L1-icache-load-misses     #    0.364 M/sec                    (43.72%)
    23,283,174,318      L1-icache-loads           # 1398.626 M/sec                    (37.48%)
         1,201,268      branch-load-misses        #    0.072 M/sec                    (37.47%)
     6,626,003,512      branch-loads              #  398.026 M/sec                    (37.47%)
         4,417,981      dTLB-load-misses          #    0.265 M/sec                    (37.47%)
            58,242      iTLB-load-misses          #    0.003 M/sec                    (37.47%)

#perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,alignment-faults,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-store-misses,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,iTLB-load-misses ./beforesort
39.8
sum = 314931600000

     1,641,714,982      branch-misses             #   41.244 M/sec                    (37.50%)
    83,450,971,727      bus-cycles                # 2096.514 M/sec                    (37.51%)
       209,942,920      cache-misses              #    0.625 % of all cache refs      (37.51%)
    33,584,108,027      cache-references          #  843.724 M/sec                    (37.51%)
    83,446,991,284      cpu-cycles                #    2.096 GHz                      (43.76%)
    83,872,213,462      instructions              #    1.01  insns per cycle          (43.75%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
               165      context-switches          #    0.004 K/sec
      39804.395840      cpu-clock (msec)
               104      cpu-migrations            #    0.003 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               728      minor-faults              #    0.018 K/sec
               728      page-faults               #    0.018 K/sec
      39804.626860      task-clock (msec)         #    1.000 CPUs utilized
       209,884,485      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    0.62% of all L1-dcache hits    (43.75%)
    33,591,847,895      L1-dcache-loads           #  843.918 M/sec                    (43.75%)
       209,796,158      L1-dcache-store-misses    #    5.271 M/sec                    (43.75%)
    33,595,628,139      L1-dcache-stores          #  844.013 M/sec                    (43.75%)
         5,575,802      L1-icache-load-misses     #    0.140 M/sec                    (43.75%)
    68,272,798,305      L1-icache-loads           # 1715.198 M/sec                    (37.50%)
     1,642,653,627      branch-load-misses        #   41.268 M/sec                    (37.50%)
     6,846,418,902      branch-loads              #  172.001 M/sec                    (37.50%)
         4,162,728      dTLB-load-misses          #    0.105 M/sec                    (37.50%)
            57,375      iTLB-load-misses          #    0.001 M/sec                    (37.50%)

Intel x86 8163

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
#perf stat -e branch-instructions,branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,ref-cycles,alignment-faults,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,LLC-load-misses,LLC-loads,LLC-store-misses,LLC-stores,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,dTLB-store-misses,dTLB-stores,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads,node-load-misses,node-loads,node-store-misses,node-stores ./aftersort
9.77
sum = 314931600000

     6,541,060,672      branch-instructions       #  669.204 M/sec                    (10.72%)
           727,847      branch-misses             #    0.01% of all branches          (14.30%)
       241,730,862      bus-cycles                #   24.731 M/sec                    (17.88%)
           275,443      cache-misses              #   44.685 % of all cache refs      (21.45%)
           616,413      cache-references          #    0.063 M/sec                    (25.03%)
    24,186,369,646      cpu-cycles                #    2.474 GHz                      (28.60%)
    29,491,804,977      instructions              #    1.22  insns per cycle          (32.18%)
    24,198,780,299      ref-cycles                # 2475.731 M/sec                    (35.75%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                16      context-switches          #    0.002 K/sec
       9774.393202      cpu-clock (msec)
                 8      cpu-migrations            #    0.001 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               490      minor-faults              #    0.050 K/sec
               490      page-faults               #    0.050 K/sec
       9774.396556      task-clock (msec)         #    1.001 CPUs utilized
        74,078,676      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    1.64% of all L1-dcache hits    (189256748561.94%)
     4,515,522,850      L1-dcache-loads           #  461.975 M/sec                    (189237344482.16%)
         3,798,032      L1-dcache-stores          #    0.389 M/sec                    (189217941721.85%)
         1,077,146      L1-icache-load-misses     #    0.110 M/sec                    (189198537875.18%)
            89,144      LLC-load-misses           #   74.54% of all LL-cache hits     (189179139811.86%)
           119,586      LLC-loads                 #    0.012 M/sec                    (189159737036.24%)
             3,450      LLC-store-misses          #    0.353 K/sec                    (189140342885.02%)
           105,021      LLC-stores                #    0.011 M/sec                    (7.15%)
           458,465      branch-load-misses        #    0.047 M/sec                    (10.73%)
     6,557,558,579      branch-loads              #  670.891 M/sec                    (14.30%)
               733      dTLB-load-misses          #    0.00% of all dTLB cache hits   (17.87%)
    12,039,967,837      dTLB-loads                # 1231.786 M/sec                    (21.44%)
               104      dTLB-store-misses         #    0.011 K/sec                    (25.01%)
         7,040,783      dTLB-stores               #    0.720 M/sec                    (28.58%)
               763      iTLB-load-misses          #   62.80% of all iTLB cache hits   (28.56%)
             1,215      iTLB-loads                #    0.124 K/sec                    (28.55%)
           168,588      node-load-misses          #    0.017 M/sec                    (28.55%)
           131,578      node-loads                #    0.013 M/sec                    (28.55%)
             4,484      node-store-misses         #    0.459 K/sec                    (7.14%)
                42      node-stores               #    0.004 K/sec                    (7.14%)
                
#perf stat -e branch-instructions,branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,ref-cycles,alignment-faults,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,LLC-load-misses,LLC-loads,LLC-store-misses,LLC-stores,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,dTLB-store-misses,dTLB-stores,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads,node-load-misses,node-loads,node-store-misses,node-stores ./beforesort
29.52
sum = 314931600000

     6,565,036,614      branch-instructions       #  222.370 M/sec                    (10.72%)
     1,599,826,737      branch-misses             #   24.37% of all branches          (14.29%)
       730,977,010      bus-cycles                #   24.760 M/sec                    (17.86%)
           920,858      cache-misses              #   48.057 % of all cache refs      (21.43%)
         1,916,178      cache-references          #    0.065 M/sec                    (25.00%)
    73,123,904,158      cpu-cycles                #    2.477 GHz                      (28.57%)
    29,618,485,912      instructions              #    0.41  insns per cycle          (32.14%)
    73,152,861,566      ref-cycles                # 2477.828 M/sec                    (35.72%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                26      context-switches          #    0.001 K/sec
      29522.972689      cpu-clock (msec)
                13      cpu-migrations            #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               593      minor-faults              #    0.020 K/sec
               593      page-faults               #    0.020 K/sec
      29522.976661      task-clock (msec)         #    1.001 CPUs utilized
        76,164,025      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    1.68% of all L1-dcache hits    (62596004730.92%)
     4,521,935,099      L1-dcache-loads           #  153.167 M/sec                    (62593882213.79%)
         1,170,288      L1-dcache-stores          #    0.040 M/sec                    (62591759384.11%)
         2,975,318      L1-icache-load-misses     #    0.101 M/sec                    (62591281765.29%)
           178,510      LLC-load-misses           #   66.98% of all LL-cache hits     (62591281765.30%)
           266,514      LLC-loads                 #    0.009 M/sec                    (62591281765.18%)
             6,841      LLC-store-misses          #    0.232 K/sec                    (62591578887.87%)
           335,369      LLC-stores                #    0.011 M/sec                    (7.15%)
     1,600,893,693      branch-load-misses        #   54.225 M/sec                    (10.72%)
     6,565,516,562      branch-loads              #  222.387 M/sec                    (14.29%)
            33,070      dTLB-load-misses          #    0.00% of all dTLB cache hits   (17.87%)
    12,043,088,689      dTLB-loads                #  407.923 M/sec                    (21.44%)
               180      dTLB-store-misses         #    0.006 K/sec                    (25.01%)
         2,359,365      dTLB-stores               #    0.080 M/sec                    (28.58%)
             9,399      iTLB-load-misses          #  849.82% of all iTLB cache hits   (28.58%)
             1,106      iTLB-loads                #    0.037 K/sec                    (28.58%)
           439,052      node-load-misses          #    0.015 M/sec                    (28.58%)
           367,546      node-loads                #    0.012 M/sec                    (28.58%)
             7,539      node-store-misses         #    0.255 K/sec                    (7.15%)
             1,736      node-stores               #    0.059 K/sec                    (7.14%)

从 x86 和 aarch 对比来看，x86 编译后的指令数是 aarch 的35%，ARM 是精简指令，数量多比较好理解。主频2.5 GHz 较 M710低了11%。

IPC 差异比较大，有一部分是因为 ARM 精简指令本来有较高的 IPC。

从排序前的差异来看除了指令集外导致 IPC 较高的原因主要也是 branch-load-misses(1,232,325,180)/branch-loads(14,776,289,690) 比 intel的 1,602,020,038/6,568,921,480, 也就是 M710的 branch miss 率比 intel 低了一倍。

排序后去掉了 branch miss 差异，M710 比 intel 快了 10%，只要是因为主频的差异

on 8269 3.2GHz

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
#perf stat -e branch-instructions,branch-misses,cpu-cycles,instructions,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,task-clock,cpu-clock ./beforesort
22.96
sum = 314931600000

 Performance counter stats for './beforesort':

     6,573,626,859      branch-instructions       #  286.177 M/sec                    (83.33%)
     1,602,898,541      branch-misses             #   24.38% of all branches          (83.33%)
    73,189,204,878      cpu-cycles                #    3.186 GHz                      (66.67%)
    29,627,520,323      instructions              #    0.40  insns per cycle          (83.33%)
     1,602,848,454      branch-load-misses        #   69.779 M/sec                    (83.33%)
     6,572,915,651      branch-loads              #  286.146 M/sec                    (83.33%)
      22970.482491      task-clock (msec)         #    1.001 CPUs utilized
      22970.482557      cpu-clock (msec)

hygon 7260

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
#perf stat -e branch-instructions,branch-misses,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,alignment-faults,bpf-output,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-prefetches,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads ./aftersort
10.9479
sum = 314931600000
     9,848,123,830      branch-instructions       #  898.161 M/sec                    (26.26%)
           496,734      branch-misses             #    0.01% of all branches          (26.30%)
           713,235      cache-misses              #    0.336 % of all cache refs      (26.34%)
       212,455,257      cache-references          #   19.376 M/sec                    (26.37%)
    27,277,461,559      cpu-cycles                #    2.488 GHz                      (26.41%)
    32,785,270,866      instructions              #    1.20  insn per cycle
                                                  #    0.58  stalled cycles per insn  (26.43%)
    19,069,766,918      stalled-cycles-backend    #   69.91% backend cycles idle      (26.43%)
         6,560,109      stalled-cycles-frontend   #    0.02% frontend cycles idle     (26.42%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      bpf-output                #    0.000 K/sec
             1,086      context-switches          #    0.099 K/sec
         10,964.61 msec cpu-clock                 #    0.999 CPUs utilized
                 0      cpu-migrations            #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               154      minor-faults              #    0.014 K/sec
               154      page-faults               #    0.014 K/sec
         10,964.91 msec task-clock                #    0.999 CPUs utilized
       206,294,123      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    1.14% of all L1-dcache hits    (26.38%)
    18,083,269,173      L1-dcache-loads           # 1649.217 M/sec                    (26.35%)
       205,499,292      L1-dcache-prefetches      #   18.742 M/sec                    (26.31%)
           749,548      L1-icache-load-misses     #    8.67% of all L1-icache hits    (26.27%)
         8,643,478      L1-icache-loads           #    0.788 M/sec                    (26.25%)
           305,577      branch-load-misses        #    0.028 M/sec                    (26.25%)
     9,850,674,490      branch-loads              #  898.394 M/sec                    (26.25%)
             6,736      dTLB-load-misses          #    6.85% of all dTLB cache hits   (26.25%)
            98,327      dTLB-loads                #    0.009 M/sec                    (26.25%)
               114      iTLB-load-misses          #   78.62% of all iTLB cache hits   (26.25%)
               145      iTLB-loads                #    0.013 K/sec                    (26.25%)
               
#perf stat -e branch-instructions,branch-misses,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,alignment-faults,bpf-output,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-prefetches,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads ./beforesort
23.3648
sum = 314931600000

     9,843,358,378      branch-instructions       #  421.186 M/sec                    (26.26%)
     1,156,804,801      branch-misses             #   11.75% of all branches          (26.28%)
           754,542      cache-misses              #    0.351 % of all cache refs      (26.29%)
       215,234,724      cache-references          #    9.210 M/sec                    (26.31%)
    58,274,116,562      cpu-cycles                #    2.493 GHz                      (26.33%)
    32,850,416,330      instructions              #    0.56  insn per cycle
                                                  #    0.06  stalled cycles per insn  (26.34%)
     1,838,222,200      stalled-cycles-backend    #    3.15% backend cycles idle      (26.34%)
     1,187,291,146      stalled-cycles-frontend   #    2.04% frontend cycles idle     (26.34%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      bpf-output                #    0.000 K/sec
             2,326      context-switches          #    0.100 K/sec
         23,370.23 msec cpu-clock                 #    0.999 CPUs utilized
                 0      cpu-migrations            #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               150      minor-faults              #    0.006 K/sec
               150      page-faults               #    0.006 K/sec
         23,370.97 msec task-clock                #    0.999 CPUs utilized
       207,451,839      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    0.82% of all L1-dcache hits    (26.34%)
    25,180,673,249      L1-dcache-loads           # 1077.451 M/sec                    (26.34%)
       205,669,557      L1-dcache-prefetches      #    8.800 M/sec                    (26.34%)
         1,725,971      L1-icache-load-misses     #    8.12% of all L1-icache hits    (26.34%)
        21,265,604      L1-icache-loads           #    0.910 M/sec                    (26.34%)
     1,157,454,249      branch-load-misses        #   49.526 M/sec                    (26.34%)
     9,843,015,406      branch-loads              #  421.171 M/sec                    (26.33%)
            22,287      dTLB-load-misses          #    7.08% of all dTLB cache hits   (26.31%)
           314,618      dTLB-loads                #    0.013 M/sec                    (26.29%)
               445      iTLB-load-misses          #   44.95% of all iTLB cache hits   (26.28%)
               990      iTLB-loads                #    0.042 K/sec                    (26.26%)

hygon 在这两个场景中排序前比 intel 好了 20%，IPC 好30%，但是指令数多了10%，最关键的也是因为hygon的 branch-load-misses 率较低。

排序后 hygon 略慢10%，主要是指令数多了将近10%。

如果直接将 intel 下 编译好的二进制放到 hygon 下运行，完全可以跑通，指令数也显示和 intel 一样了，但是总时间较在hygon下编译的二进制没有变化

image-20230308145915585

Intel Xeon 6982P-C (Granite Rapids, 2024)

阿里云 ECS ecs.g9i.4xlarge，16vCPU/64G，实测全核频率 3800MHz。编译选项 -O0（禁止优化，保留真实分支指令）。

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
#taskset -c 0 perf stat -e task-clock,cpu-cycles,instructions,branches,branch-misses,cache-references,cache-misses /tmp/aftersort_O0
4.17436
sum = 314931600000

 Performance counter stats for '/tmp/aftersort_O0':

          4,183.54 msec task-clock                #    1.000 CPUs utilized          
    14,972,595,661      cpu-cycles                #    3.579 GHz                    
    32,839,518,267      instructions              #    2.19  insn per cycle         
     9,837,961,478      branches                  #    2.352 G/sec                  
           371,393      branch-misses             #    0.00% of all branches        
           114,907      cache-references          #   27.466 K/sec                  
            24,829      cache-misses              #   21.608 % of all cache refs    

       4.184053901 seconds time elapsed

#taskset -c 0 perf stat -e task-clock,cpu-cycles,instructions,branches,branch-misses,cache-references,cache-misses /tmp/beforesort_O0
13.4787
sum = 314931600000

 Performance counter stats for '/tmp/beforesort_O0':

         13,497.75 msec task-clock                #    1.000 CPUs utilized          
    48,324,709,655      cpu-cycles                #    3.580 GHz                    
    32,848,735,148      instructions              #    0.68  insn per cycle         
     9,839,898,328      branches                  #  729.003 M/sec                  
     1,480,501,942      branch-misses             #   15.05% of all branches        
           273,735      cache-references          #   20.280 K/sec                  
            43,316      cache-misses              #   15.824 % of all cache refs    

      13.498692941 seconds time elapsed

排序后 IPC 2.19，未排序 IPC 跌到 0.68，branch-misses 15.05%。分支 miss 导致耗时增加 3.2 倍（4.18s → 13.48s）。

AMD EPYC 9T25 (Turin / Zen 5, 2024)

阿里云 ECS ecs.g9a.4xlarge，16vCPU/64G，实测全核频率 ~3804MHz。编译选项 -O0。

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
#taskset -c 0 perf stat -e task-clock,cpu-cycles,instructions,branches,branch-misses,cache-references,cache-misses,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-icache-load-misses /tmp/aftersort_O0
1.78043
sum = 314931600000

 Performance counter stats for '/tmp/aftersort_O0':

          1,787.23 msec task-clock                #    1.000 CPUs utilized          
     7,355,725,718      cpu-cycles                #    4.116 GHz                      (66.62%)
    32,831,746,236      instructions              #    4.46  insn per cycle           (66.62%)
     9,836,542,470      branches                  #    5.504 G/sec                    (66.62%)
           375,979      branch-misses             #    0.00% of all branches          (66.63%)
       208,236,438      cache-references          #  116.513 M/sec                    (66.70%)
                 0      cache-misses              #    0.000 % of all cache refs      (66.75%)
       191,891,443      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    8.79% of all L1-dcache accesses  (66.75%)
     2,184,169,228      L1-dcache-loads           #    1.300 G/sec                    (66.69%)
           132,576      L1-icache-load-misses                                         (66.62%)

       1.680777489 seconds time elapsed

#taskset -c 0 perf stat -e task-clock,cpu-cycles,instructions,branches,branch-misses,cache-references,cache-misses,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-icache-load-misses /tmp/beforesort_O0
1.58617
sum = 314931600000

 Performance counter stats for '/tmp/beforesort_O0':

          1,676.61 msec task-clock                #    1.000 CPUs utilized          
     6,137,448,863      cpu-cycles                #    3.661 GHz                      (66.56%)
    17,471,802,456      instructions              #    2.85  insn per cycle           (66.62%)
     2,954,606,407      branches                  #    1.762 G/sec                    (66.68%)
           156,535      branch-misses             #    0.01% of all branches          (66.72%)
       138,261,415      cache-references          #   82.465 M/sec                    (66.73%)
            57,230      cache-misses              #    0.041 % of all cache refs      (66.72%)
       191,758,040      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    8.77% of all L1-dcache accesses  (66.71%)
     2,186,527,160      L1-dcache-loads           #    1.304 G/sec                    (66.65%)
           123,743      L1-icache-load-misses                                         (66.59%)

       1.676977471 seconds time elapsed

排序后 IPC 4.46（是 Intel 的 2 倍），未排序 IPC 2.91，branch-misses 仅 1.59%（Intel 的 1/10）。分支 miss 导致耗时仅增加 53%（1.78s → 2.73s），远低于 Intel 的 222%。

Xeon 6982P-C vs EPYC 9T25 对比小结

指标 Intel 6982P-C AMD 9T25 差距
排序后耗时 4.18s 1.78s AMD 快 2.35x
排序后 IPC 2.19 4.46 AMD 高 104%
排序后 branch-miss 0.00% 0.00% 持平
未排序耗时 13.48s 2.73s AMD 快 4.94x
未排序 IPC 0.68 2.91 AMD 高 328%
未排序 branch-miss 15.05% 1.59% AMD miss 率低 10x
未排序减速比 3.2x 1.5x Intel 惩罚大 2 倍

两层差距：(1) 纯 IPC 差距——即使分支全部可预测，AMD 仍快 2.35 倍（Zen 5 的 8 宽解码 + 4 load 单元 vs Redwood Cove 的 6 宽 + 3 load）；(2) 分支预测器准确率——面对 50% 随机分支，AMD 预测器能从 32768 个元素的固定序列中记住每个位置的分支方向（miss 1.59%），Intel 记不住（miss 15.05%）。

测试时间：2026-08-31，阿里云 ECS 第九代 g9i/g9a 机型。

开启 gcc O3 优化

intel 8163

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
#perf stat -e branch-instructions,branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,ref-cycles,alignment-faults,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,LLC-load-misses,LLC-loads,LLC-store-misses,LLC-stores,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,dTLB-store-misses,dTLB-stores,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads,node-load-misses,node-loads,node-store-misses,node-stores ./beforesort
2.94
sum = 314931600000

     3,268,501,946      branch-instructions       # 1109.263 M/sec                    (10.74%)
           226,833      branch-misses             #    0.01% of all branches          (14.33%)
        72,998,727      bus-cycles                #   24.774 M/sec                    (17.90%)
            89,636      cache-misses              #   34.026 % of all cache refs      (21.47%)
           263,434      cache-references          #    0.089 M/sec                    (25.03%)
     7,301,839,495      cpu-cycles                #    2.478 GHz                      (28.59%)
    26,180,809,574      instructions              #    3.59  insns per cycle          (32.16%)
     7,304,150,283      ref-cycles                # 2478.880 M/sec                    (35.73%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                10      context-switches          #    0.003 K/sec
       2946.550492      cpu-clock (msec)
                 7      cpu-migrations            #    0.002 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               370      minor-faults              #    0.126 K/sec
               370      page-faults               #    0.126 K/sec
       2946.552985      task-clock (msec)         #    1.001 CPUs utilized
        73,550,829      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    8.97% of all L1-dcache hits    (627063379426.55%)
       820,264,255      L1-dcache-loads           #  278.381 M/sec                    (627063379426.55%)
             6,301      L1-dcache-stores          #    0.002 M/sec                    (627063379426.52%)
           344,639      L1-icache-load-misses     #    0.117 M/sec                    (627063379426.51%)
            70,181      LLC-load-misses           #   84.80% of all LL-cache hits     (630745019998.59%)
            82,757      LLC-loads                 #    0.028 M/sec                    (630529428492.86%)
               592      LLC-store-misses          #    0.201 K/sec                    (630313967916.99%)
            33,362      LLC-stores                #    0.011 M/sec                    (7.17%)
           153,522      branch-load-misses        #    0.052 M/sec                    (10.75%)
     3,263,884,498      branch-loads              # 1107.696 M/sec                    (14.33%)
               274      dTLB-load-misses          #    0.00% of all dTLB cache hits   (17.90%)
     2,179,821,780      dTLB-loads                #  739.787 M/sec                    (21.47%)
                 8      dTLB-store-misses         #    0.003 K/sec                    (25.04%)
            12,708      dTLB-stores               #    0.004 M/sec                    (28.61%)
                59      iTLB-load-misses          #   52.68% of all iTLB cache hits   (28.60%)
               112      iTLB-loads                #    0.038 K/sec                    (28.59%)
             5,919      node-load-misses          #    0.002 M/sec                    (28.59%)
             1,648      node-loads                #    0.559 K/sec                    (28.58%)
               560      node-store-misses         #    0.190 K/sec                    (7.15%)
                14      node-stores               #    0.005 K/sec                    (7.14%)
                
#perf stat -e branch-instructions,branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,ref-cycles,alignment-faults,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-dcache-stores,L1-icache-load-misses,LLC-load-misses,LLC-loads,LLC-store-misses,LLC-stores,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,dTLB-store-misses,dTLB-stores,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads,node-load-misses,node-loads,node-store-misses,node-stores ./aftersort
2.95
sum = 314931600000

     3,255,184,180      branch-instructions       # 1102.320 M/sec                    (10.74%)
           791,180      branch-misses             #    0.02% of all branches          (14.35%)
        73,001,075      bus-cycles                #   24.721 M/sec                    (17.93%)
           520,140      cache-misses              #   82.262 % of all cache refs      (21.52%)
           632,298      cache-references          #    0.214 M/sec                    (25.11%)
     7,309,286,959      cpu-cycles                #    2.475 GHz                      (28.69%)
    26,120,077,275      instructions              #    3.57  insns per cycle          (32.28%)
     7,316,568,954      ref-cycles                # 2477.649 M/sec                    (35.86%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                10      context-switches          #    0.003 K/sec
       2953.027151      cpu-clock (msec)
                 3      cpu-migrations            #    0.001 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               370      minor-faults              #    0.125 K/sec
               370      page-faults               #    0.125 K/sec
       2953.029425      task-clock (msec)         #    1.001 CPUs utilized
        73,778,174      L1-dcache-load-misses     #    8.94% of all L1-dcache hits    (625801033059.49%)
       825,038,324      L1-dcache-loads           #  279.387 M/sec                    (625693600466.98%)
             6,137      L1-dcache-stores          #    0.002 M/sec                    (625693600466.94%)
           339,275      L1-icache-load-misses     #    0.115 M/sec                    (625693600466.87%)
             7,611      LLC-load-misses           #   52.34% of all LL-cache hits     (625693600466.22%)
            14,542      LLC-loads                 #    0.005 M/sec                    (625693600466.18%)
               975      LLC-store-misses          #    0.330 K/sec                    (625718826721.74%)
            28,542      LLC-stores                #    0.010 M/sec                    (7.17%)
           150,256      branch-load-misses        #    0.051 M/sec                    (10.75%)
     3,260,765,171      branch-loads              # 1104.210 M/sec                    (14.33%)
                84      dTLB-load-misses          #    0.00% of all dTLB cache hits   (17.91%)
     2,177,927,665      dTLB-loads                #  737.523 M/sec                    (21.48%)
                 0      dTLB-store-misses         #    0.000 K/sec                    (25.05%)
            12,502      dTLB-stores               #    0.004 M/sec                    (28.62%)
                10      iTLB-load-misses          #    5.62% of all iTLB cache hits   (28.61%)
               178      iTLB-loads                #    0.060 K/sec                    (28.60%)
            14,538      node-load-misses          #    0.005 M/sec                    (28.59%)
             1,527      node-loads                #    0.517 K/sec                    (28.62%)
             2,339      node-store-misses         #    0.792 K/sec                    (7.18%)
                 0      node-stores               #    0.000 K/sec                    (7.14%)

可以看到 O3 优化后是否排序执行时间差不多，并且都比没有 O3 前的快几倍，指令数较优化前基本不变。

最明显的是排序前的 branch-load-misses 几乎都被优化掉了，这也导致 IPC 从0.41 提升到了3.59

aarch64 M710

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
#perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,alignment-faults,bpf-output,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,LLC-load-misses,LLC-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads  ./beforesort
1.19468
sum = 314931600000

           178,045      branch-misses                                                 (29.84%)
     3,290,281,574      bus-cycles                # 2748.321 M/sec                    (29.84%)
       204,017,139      cache-misses              #   24.768 % of all cache refs      (29.84%)
       823,700,482      cache-references          #  688.024 M/sec                    (29.84%)
     3,290,247,311      cpu-cycles                #    2.748 GHz                      (34.85%)
     5,730,855,778      instructions              #    1.74  insn per cycle
                                                  #    0.26  stalled cycles per insn  (34.85%)
     1,485,014,712      stalled-cycles-backend    #   45.13% backend cycles idle      (35.03%)
           980,441      stalled-cycles-frontend   #    0.03% frontend cycles idle     (35.08%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      bpf-output                #    0.000 K/sec
                 2      context-switches          #    0.002 K/sec
          1,197.20 msec cpu-clock                 #    1.000 CPUs utilized
                 0      cpu-migrations            #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               140      minor-faults              #    0.117 K/sec
               140      page-faults               #    0.117 K/sec
          1,197.20 msec task-clock                #    1.000 CPUs utilized
       205,399,817      L1-dcache-load-misses     #   25.00% of all L1-dcache accesses  (35.08%)
       821,607,081      L1-dcache-loads           #  686.276 M/sec                    (35.08%)
            10,361      L1-icache-load-misses     #    0.00% of all L1-icache accesses  (35.08%)
     1,150,511,080      L1-icache-loads           #  961.004 M/sec                    (30.07%)
             6,275      LLC-load-misses           #    0.00% of all LL-cache accesses  (30.07%)
                 0      LLC-loads                 #    0.000 K/sec                    (30.07%)
           103,368      branch-load-misses        #    0.086 M/sec                    (30.07%)
       821,524,106      branch-loads              #  686.206 M/sec                    (30.07%)
            15,315      dTLB-load-misses          #    0.00% of all dTLB cache accesses  (30.07%)
       821,589,564      dTLB-loads                #  686.261 M/sec                    (30.07%)
             1,084      iTLB-load-misses          #    0.07% of all iTLB cache accesses  (30.07%)
         1,613,786      iTLB-loads                #    1.348 M/sec                    (29.89%)


#perf stat -e branch-misses,bus-cycles,cache-misses,cache-references,cpu-cycles,instructions,stalled-cycles-backend,stalled-cycles-frontend,alignment-faults,bpf-output,context-switches,cpu-clock,cpu-migrations,dummy,emulation-faults,major-faults,minor-faults,page-faults,task-clock,L1-dcache-load-misses,L1-dcache-loads,L1-icache-load-misses,L1-icache-loads,LLC-load-misses,LLC-loads,branch-load-misses,branch-loads,dTLB-load-misses,dTLB-loads,iTLB-load-misses,iTLB-loads  ./aftersort
1.1949
sum = 314931600000

           656,175      branch-misses                                                 (29.91%)
     3,293,615,450      bus-cycles                # 2748.397 M/sec                    (29.91%)
       203,683,518      cache-misses              #   24.631 % of all cache refs      (29.91%)
       826,934,774      cache-references          #  690.046 M/sec                    (29.91%)
     3,293,560,111      cpu-cycles                #    2.748 GHz                      (34.92%)
     5,732,241,288      instructions              #    1.74  insn per cycle
                                                  #    0.29  stalled cycles per insn  (34.91%)
     1,645,938,192      stalled-cycles-backend    #   49.97% backend cycles idle      (35.00%)
         1,757,056      stalled-cycles-frontend   #    0.05% frontend cycles idle     (35.05%)
                 0      alignment-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      bpf-output                #    0.000 K/sec
                 2      context-switches          #    0.002 K/sec
          1,198.38 msec cpu-clock                 #    1.000 CPUs utilized
                 0      cpu-migrations            #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      dummy                     #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      emulation-faults          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0      major-faults              #    0.000 K/sec
               137      minor-faults              #    0.114 K/sec
               137      page-faults               #    0.114 K/sec
          1,198.38 msec task-clock                #    1.000 CPUs utilized
       205,557,180      L1-dcache-load-misses     #   25.00% of all L1-dcache accesses  (35.05%)
       822,366,213      L1-dcache-loads           #  686.233 M/sec                    (35.04%)
            12,708      L1-icache-load-misses     #    0.00% of all L1-icache accesses  (35.05%)
       987,422,733      L1-icache-loads           #  823.967 M/sec                    (30.04%)
             6,234      LLC-load-misses           #    0.00% of all LL-cache accesses  (30.04%)
                 0      LLC-loads                 #    0.000 K/sec                    (30.04%)
           103,635      branch-load-misses        #    0.086 M/sec                    (30.04%)
       822,357,251      branch-loads              #  686.226 M/sec                    (30.04%)
            13,961      dTLB-load-misses          #    0.00% of all dTLB cache accesses  (30.04%)
       822,374,897      dTLB-loads                #  686.241 M/sec                    (30.04%)
               709      iTLB-load-misses          #    0.05% of all iTLB cache accesses  (30.04%)
         1,562,083      iTLB-loads                #    1.303 M/sec                    (29.96%)

可以看到在M710上开启 O3 优化后是否排序执行时间差不多，并且都比没有 O3 前

的快几倍，最明显的是指令数只有之前的7%。另外就是排序前的 branch-load-misses 几乎都被优化掉了，虽然这里 IPC 提升不大但主要在指令数的减少上。

O3意味着代码尽可能展开，更长的代码意味着对 L1i（以及 L2和更高级别）高速缓存的压力更高。这会导致性能降低。更短的代码可以运行得更快。幸运的是，gcc 有一个优化选项可以指定此项。如果使用-Os，则编译器将优化代码大小。使用后，能够增加代码大小的哪些优化将被禁用。使用此选项通常会产生令人惊讶的结果。特别是循环展开和内联没有实质优势时，那么此选项将是一个很好的选择。

分支预测原理介绍

img

如上图的上面部分代表通常情况下的简单代码布局。如果区域 B（这里是内联函数 inlfct 生成的代码）经常由于条件 I 被跳过，而不会执行，处理器的预取将拉入很少使用的包含块 B 的高速缓存行。使用块重新排序可以改变这种局面，改变之后的效果可以在图的下半部分看到。经常执行的代码在内存中是线性的，而很少执行的代码被移动到不会损害预取和 L1i 效率的位置。

Linux内核流水线优化案例

在Linux Kernel中有大量的 likely/unlikely

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
//ip 层收到消息后，如果是tcp就调用tcp_v4_rcv作为tcp协议的入口
int tcp_v4_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb)
{
  ...
	if (unlikely(th->doff < sizeof(struct tcphdr) / 4))
		goto bad_packet; //概率很小
	if (!pskb_may_pull(skb, th->doff * 4))
		goto discard_it;
  
//file: net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
int tcp_rcv_established(struct sock *sk, ...)
{
 if (unlikely(sk->sk_rx_dst == NULL))
  ......
}

//file: include/linux/compiler.h
#define likely(x)   __builtin_expect(!!(x),1)
#define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x),0)

__builtin_expect 这个指令是 gcc 引入的。该函数作用是允许程序员将最有可能执行的分支告诉编译器，来辅助系统进行分支预测。(参见 https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Other-Builtins.html)

它的用法为：__builtin_expect(EXP, N)。意思是：EXP == N的概率很大。那么上面 likely 和 unlikely 这两句的具体含义就是：

  • __builtin_expect(!!(x),1) x 为真的可能性更大 //0两次取反还是0，非0两次取反都是1，这样可以适配__builtin_expect(EXP, N)的N，要不N的参数没法传
  • __builtin_expect(!!(x),0) x 为假的可能性更大

当正确地使用了__builtin_expect后，编译器在编译过程中会根据程序员的指令，将可能性更大的代码紧跟着前面的代码，从而减少指令跳转带来的性能上的下降。让L1i中加载的代码尽量有效紧凑

这样可以让 CPU流水线分支预测的时候默认走可能性更大的分支。如果分支预测错误所有流水线都要取消重新计算。

如果程序员利用这些宏，然后使用 -freorder-blocks 优化选项，则 gcc 将对块进行重新排序，如原理解图所示。该选项在 -O 2中启用，但在-Os 中禁用。还有另一种对块进行重新排序的选项（-freorder-blocks-and-partition ），但是它的用处有限，因为它不适用于异常处理。

总结

测试方法论

本测试的精妙之处在于：排序后 vs 未排序跑的指令数完全一样（同一段代码、同样多的循环），唯一区别是 if (data[c] >= 128) 的分支结果序列不同。因此：

  • 排序后的数据 = 纯 IPC 基准线：branch-miss 率接近 0%，消除了分支预测的干扰，剩下的耗时差异纯粹反映 CPU 流水线宽度和执行效率（解码宽度、执行端口数、load 单元数）
  • 未排序的数据 = IPC + 分支预测的综合表现：50% 随机分支考验预测器准确率，miss 后流水线冲刷的惩罚直接体现在 IPC 下降和耗时增加上
  • 两者的差值 = 分支预测带来的纯惩罚：同一颗 CPU 排序前后的耗时差就是分支 miss 导致的性能损失

未排序（分支难预测）运行数据对比

branch-miss 率 instructions IPC 耗时(秒) 排序后耗时(秒) 减速比
鲲鹏920 21.7% 83,694,841,472 1.04 30.92 11.44 2.7x
M710 8.3% 77,083,625,280 1.66 16.89 8.20 2.1x
Intel 8163 24.4% 29,618,485,912 0.41 29.52 9.77 3.0x
hygon 7260 11.8% 32,850,416,330 0.56 23.36 10.95 2.1x
FT S2500 24% 83,872,213,462 1.01 39.8 16.63 2.4x
Intel 6982P-C 15.05% 32,848,735,148 0.68 13.48 4.18 3.2x
AMD 9T25 1.59% 32,814,347,862 2.91 2.73 1.78 1.5x

排序后（分支可预测）运行数据对比——纯 IPC 基准线

instructions instructions(排序前) IPC 耗时(秒)
鲲鹏920 83,666,813,837 83,694,841,472 2.82 11.44
M710 77,068,271,833 77,083,625,280 3.42 8.20
Intel 8163 29,491,804,977 29,618,485,912 1.22 9.77
hygon 7260 32,785,270,866 32,850,416,330 1.20 10.95
FT S2500 83,918,069,835 83,872,213,462 2.41 16.63
Intel 6982P-C 32,839,518,267 32,848,735,148 2.19 4.18
AMD 9T25 32,831,746,236 32,814,347,862 4.46 1.78

关键结论

  • 所有 CPU 都期望对分支预测友好的代码
  • 分支预测重点关注 perf branch-load-misses/branch-loads
  • aarch64 较 x86_64 指令数是2.6倍，同时对流水线更友好，也就是 IPC 更高(2.6倍)，测试代码单线程、无锁
  • M710的分支预测正确率是鲲鹏920、intel的3倍，hygon 是鲲鹏 、intel的分支预测率的2倍
  • AMD 9T25 (Zen 5) 的分支预测准确率是所有 7 款 CPU 中最高的：miss 率仅 1.59%，是 Intel 6982P-C 的 1/10，是老款 Intel 8163 的 1/15
  • AMD 9T25 排序后 IPC 4.46 是所有 CPU 中最高的，比 Intel 6982P-C 的 2.19 高出一倍，说明 Zen 5 的 8 宽解码 + 4 load 单元的架构优势在排除分支预测干扰后依然碾压
  • 分支 miss 的减速比：Intel 6982P-C 减速 3.2 倍（最严重），AMD 9T25 仅减速 1.5 倍（最轻微）。AMD 受分支 miss 影响最小的原因是预测器足够准确（miss 率低），而非单次 miss 惩罚小（两家的单次 miss penalty 都约 22-25 cycles）
  • Intel 从 8163 (Skylake, 2017) 到 6982P-C (Granite Rapids, 2024)，7 年间分支 miss 率从 24.4% 降到 15.05%（改善 38%），IPC 从 0.41 提升到 0.68（+66%）。AMD 同期从 hygon 7260 (Zen 1, 2019) 到 9T25 (Zen 5, 2024)，miss 率从 11.8% 降到 1.59%（改善 87%），IPC 从 0.56 提升到 2.91（+419%）。AMD 的进化速度远超 Intel
  • 10% 的分支load miss 会带来一倍的性能差异
  • gcc O3 优化效果很明显，代价就是代码展开后很大，容易造成icache不够，对小段测试代码效果最好，实践不一定
  • 测试代码只是极简场景，实际生产环境更复杂，也就是预测效果不会这么明显。但在 MySQL sysbench 点查实测中，AMD 9T25 在 128 线程下比 Intel 6982P-C 快 40%，与本测试揭示的 IPC 和分支预测优势方向一致