Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 6094361
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 23, 20262026-05-23T12:40:07+00:00 2026-05-23T12:40:07+00:00

I was just running some multithreaded code on a 4-core machine in the hopes

  • 0

I was just running some multithreaded code on a 4-core machine in the hopes that it would be faster than on a single-core machine. Here’s the idea: I got a fixed number of threads (in my case one thread per core). Every thread executes a Runnable of the form:

private static int[] data; // data shared across all threads


public void run() {

    int i = 0;

    while (i++ < 5000) {

        // do some work
        for (int j = 0; j < 10000 / numberOfThreads) {
            // each thread performs calculations and reads from and
            // writes to a different part of the data array
        }

        // wait for the other threads
        barrier.await();
    }
}

On a quadcore machine, this code performs worse with 4 threads than it does with 1 thread. Even with the CyclicBarrier‘s overhead, I would have thought that the code should perform at least 2 times faster. Why does it run slower?

EDIT: Here’s a busy wait implementation I tried. Unfortunately, it makes the program run slower on more cores (also being discussed in a separate question here):

public void run() {

    // do work

    synchronized (this) {

        if (atomicInt.decrementAndGet() == 0) {

            atomicInt.set(numberOfOperations);

            for (int i = 0; i < threads.length; i++)
                threads[i].interrupt();
        }
    }

    while (!Thread.interrupted()) {}
}
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-23T12:40:08+00:00Added an answer on May 23, 2026 at 12:40 pm

    Adding more threads is not necessarily guarenteed to improve performance. There are a number of possible causes for decreased performance with additional threads:

    • Coarse-grained locking may overly serialize execution – that is, a lock may result in only one thread running at a time. You get all the overhead of multiple threads but none of the benefits. Try to reduce how long locks are held.
    • The same applies to overly frequent barriers and other synchronization structures. If the inner j loop completes quickly, you might spend most of your time in the barrier. Try to do more work between synchronization points.
    • If your code runs too quickly, there may be no time to migrate threads to other CPU cores. This usually isn’t a problem unless you create a lot of very short-lived threads. Using thread pools, or simply giving each thread more work can help. If your threads run for more than a second or so each, this is unlikely to be a problem.
    • If your threads are working on a lot of shared read/write data, cache line bouncing may decrease performance. That said, although this often results in performance degradation, this alone is unlikely to result in performance worse than the single threaded case. Try to make sure the data that each thread writes is separated from other threads’ data by the size of a cache line (usually around 64 bytes). In particular, don’t have output arrays laid out like [thread A, B, C, D, A, B, C, D ...]

    Since you haven’t shown your code, I can’t really speak in any more detail here.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I was just running style cop against some of my code and got a
I'm running some test to prove a concept and i just wrote this code
I've just been running some simple debug tests against arrays, and noticed that when
I encountered a problem when running some old code that was handed down to
I just downloaded wxPython, and was running some of the sample programs from here
I am running some code that I have written in C which calls the
I've just upgraded some old Java source which has been running on a Sun
Just wondering if anyone else has spotted this: On some user's machines running our
I've just started doing some PowerShell scripting, and I'm running into a problem testing
Just a conceptual question that I've been running into. In my current project it

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.