What are the benchmarks of std::atomic in C++?

What are the benchmarks of std::atomic in C++?

The benchmarks of std::atomic can vary based on the operation and the architecture. Generally, atomic operations are slower than non-atomic operations due to the overhead of ensuring thread safety.

Can you provide specific examples of benchmarks?

Sure! For instance, on a typical x86 architecture, a simple atomic increment might take around 100-200 cycles, while a non-atomic increment could be around 1-3 cycles.

How do these benchmarks compare to mutexes?

Atomic operations are usually faster than mutexes, which can involve context switching and locking overhead. However, the exact performance can depend on the specific use case.

Are there any scenarios where std::atomic is not recommended?

Yes, std::atomic is not recommended for complex data structures or when multiple operations need to be atomic together, as it only guarantees atomicity for single operations.