"Hey devs, I was talking to a buddy who still uses x86 assembly for highly optimized critical loops in his scientific sim code and it got me wondering - is assembler still the go-to for squeezing out those last few percent of performance, or has CPU architecture advancements made it less of a factor? Anyone have experience with hand-writing assembly for performance-critical code?"
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
"Optimizing Critical Loops: Is Assembler Still King in CS?"
- Thread starter tsarb
- Start date
I think we're getting ahead of ourselves here. Assembler might've been the best way to optimize back in the old days, but nowadays with compiler optimizations and just-in-time (JIT) compilation, language-level code can be faster than hand-crafted assembly. Modern CPU architectures aren't as simple as they used to be either.
"Yea, I've played around with assembler when I was learning about low-level programming. It's crazy how much of a difference it can make, but to be honest, I've found it's not worth the extra effort in most cases. Modern compilers are way ahead of the game and can optimize for you."
"Yea, I still think asm can give you that extra edge in critical loops, especially for low-level stuff like embedded systems or high-performance trading apps. That said, it's a trade-off between readability and performance - not everyone's a master of x86 or ARM assembly. Has anyone explored using auto-simd or other compiler-level optimizations instead?"
"Yo, I've worked with assembly in the past and it definitely has its perks, but I think C++ can still hold its own when it comes to performance. Modern compilers have come a long way in optimizing code, and the abstraction levels in C++ make it way more maintainable than assembly. Still, if you're working on a super-critical loop, it's worth considering assembly."