A comparison of two performance portability metrics

Abstract

SummaryThe rise in the demand for new performance portability frameworks for heterogeneous computing systems has brought with it a number of proposals of workable metrics for evaluating the performance portability of applications. The aim of this article is twofold. First, we analyze the underlying principles of the criteria and definition of the revised Ⴔ metric and show that these principles are partially correct and suffer from a lack of a solid and clear performance portability model. We prove mathematically and demonstrate it practically that the principles are only correct for the architectural efficiency approach based on throughputs but are incorrect for the popular application efficiency approach based on run‐times. Second, we are examining whether the Ⴔ and metrics meet the requirements of consistency, proportionality, and lossless information. We use examples from the scientific literature to show the reader that the Ⴔ metric loses information while the metric and other metrics do not lose information.