-
-
Save jboner/2841832 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Latency Comparison Numbers (~2012) | |
---------------------------------- | |
L1 cache reference 0.5 ns | |
Branch mispredict 5 ns | |
L2 cache reference 7 ns 14x L1 cache | |
Mutex lock/unlock 25 ns | |
Main memory reference 100 ns 20x L2 cache, 200x L1 cache | |
Compress 1K bytes with Zippy 3,000 ns 3 us | |
Send 1K bytes over 1 Gbps network 10,000 ns 10 us | |
Read 4K randomly from SSD* 150,000 ns 150 us ~1GB/sec SSD | |
Read 1 MB sequentially from memory 250,000 ns 250 us | |
Round trip within same datacenter 500,000 ns 500 us | |
Read 1 MB sequentially from SSD* 1,000,000 ns 1,000 us 1 ms ~1GB/sec SSD, 4X memory | |
Disk seek 10,000,000 ns 10,000 us 10 ms 20x datacenter roundtrip | |
Read 1 MB sequentially from disk 20,000,000 ns 20,000 us 20 ms 80x memory, 20X SSD | |
Send packet CA->Netherlands->CA 150,000,000 ns 150,000 us 150 ms | |
Notes | |
----- | |
1 ns = 10^-9 seconds | |
1 us = 10^-6 seconds = 1,000 ns | |
1 ms = 10^-3 seconds = 1,000 us = 1,000,000 ns | |
Credit | |
------ | |
By Jeff Dean: http://research.google.com/people/jeff/ | |
Originally by Peter Norvig: http://norvig.com/21-days.html#answers | |
Contributions | |
------------- | |
'Humanized' comparison: https://gist.github.com/hellerbarde/2843375 | |
Visual comparison chart: http://i.imgur.com/k0t1e.png |
the numbers are from Dr. Dean from Google reveals the length of typical computer operations in 2010. I hope someone could update them as it's 2023
The numbers should be still quite similar.
These numbers based on Physical limitation only significant technological leap can make a difference.
In any case, these are for estimates, not exact calculation. For example, 1MB read from SSD is different for each SSD, but it should be somewhere around the Millisecond range.
it could be useful to add a column with the sizes in the hierarchy. Also, a column of the minimal memory units sizes, the cache line sizes etc. Then you can also divide the sizes by the latencies, which would be some kind of limit for a simple algorithm throughput. Not really sure if this is useful though.
I see "Read 1 MB sequentially from disk", but how about disk write?