Non c'è differenza nell'utilizzo della CPU tra algoritmi di controllo della congestione in QUIC secondo l'analisi di CDN77 (DataCamp):
Both BBRv1 and BBRv2 are much more computationally complex than Cubic. Cubic is de facto event-based, where each dropped packet manipulates the congestion window (CWND) by a scaling constant, meaning the algorithm has minimal bookkeeping. On the other hand, both BBRv1 and BBRv2 maintain a state machine, which is much more computationally expensive.
BBRv2 maintains more parameters than BBRv1, which adds to the computational complexity.
Nevertheless, we have not seen any measurable difference in CPU usage between Cubic, BBRv1, and BBRv2. We can conclude that the overhead of BBRv1 and BBRv2 is negligible.