虽然没有完整 对并行和并发这两个术语的区别达成一致， 许多作者做了以下区分:

在并发计算中，一个程序可以在任意时刻执行多个任务。 在并行计算中，一个程序是多个任务紧密合作的程序 解决一个问题。

所以并行程序是并发的，但是像多任务操作系统这样的程序也是并发的，即使它运行在一台带有 只有一个核心，因为多个任务可以在任何时刻进行。

来源:Peter Pacheco的《并行编程介绍》

它们是从(非常轻微的)不同的角度描述同一件事情的两个短语。并行编程是从硬件的角度描述情况——至少有两个处理器(可能在一个物理包中)并行处理一个问题。并发编程更多地是从软件的角度描述事情——两个或多个操作可能同时(并发)发生。

这里的问题是，人们试图用这两个短语来做出明确的区分，但实际上这两个短语并不存在。现实情况是，几十年来，他们试图划定的分界线一直是模糊的，而且随着时间的推移越来越模糊。

What they're trying to discuss is the fact that once upon a time, most computers had only a single CPU. When you executed multiple processes (or threads) on that single CPU, the CPU was only really executing one instruction from one of those threads at a time. The appearance of concurrency was an illusion--the CPU switching between executing instructions from different threads quickly enough that to human perception (to which anything less than 100 ms or so looks instantaneous) it looked like it was doing many things at once.

与此形成鲜明对比的是具有多个CPU或多核CPU的计算机，因此机器正在同时执行来自多个线程和/或进程的指令;执行其中一个的代码不能/不会对执行另一个的代码产生任何影响。

Now the problem: such a clean distinction has almost never existed. Computer designers are actually fairly intelligent, so they noticed a long time ago that (for example) when you needed to read some data from an I/O device such as a disk, it took a long time (in terms of CPU cycles) to finish. Instead of leaving the CPU idle while that happened, they figured out various ways of letting one process/thread make an I/O request, and let code from some other process/thread execute on the CPU while the I/O request completed.

因此，早在多核cpu成为标准之前，我们就有多个线程并行进行操作。

That's only the tip of the iceberg though. Decades ago, computers started providing another level of parallelism as well. Again, being fairly intelligent people, computer designers noticed that in a lot of cases, they had instructions that didn't affect each other, so it was possible to execute more than one instruction from the same stream at the same time. One early example that became pretty well known was the Control Data 6600. This was (by a fairly wide margin) the fastest computer on earth when it was introduced in 1964--and much of the same basic architecture remains in use today. It tracked the resources used by each instruction, and had a set of execution units that executed instructions as soon as the resources on which they depended became available, very similar to the design of most recent Intel/AMD processors.

But (as the commercials used to say) wait--that's not all. There's yet another design element to add still further confusion. It's been given quite a few different names (e.g., "Hyperthreading", "SMT", "CMP"), but they all refer to the same basic idea: a CPU that can execute multiple threads simultaneously, using a combination of some resources that are independent for each thread, and some resources that are shared between the threads. In a typical case this is combined with the instruction-level parallelism outlined above. To do that, we have two (or more) sets of architectural registers. Then we have a set of execution units that can execute instructions as soon as the necessary resources become available. These often combine well because the instructions from the separate streams virtually never depend on the same resources.

然后，当然，我们会讲到具有多核的现代系统。这里的情况很明显，对吧?我们有N个(目前大约在2到256之间)独立的内核，它们都可以同时执行指令，所以我们有了真正的并行性的清晰案例——在一个进程/线程中执行指令不会影响在另一个进程/线程中执行指令。

嗯，算是吧。即使在这里，我们也有一些独立的资源(寄存器、执行单元、至少一个级别的缓存)和一些共享资源(通常至少是最低级别的缓存，当然还有内存控制器和内存带宽)。

To summarize: the simple scenarios people like to contrast between shared resources and independent resources virtually never happen in real life. With all resources shared, we end up with something like MS-DOS, where we can only run one program at a time, and we have to stop running one before we can run the other at all. With completely independent resources, we have N computers running MS-DOS (without even a network to connect them) with no ability to share anything between them at all (because if we can even share a file, well, that's a shared resource, a violation of the basic premise of nothing being shared).

每个有趣的案例都涉及到独立资源和共享资源的某种组合。每一台相当现代的计算机(以及许多根本不现代的计算机)都至少有一些能力同时执行至少几个独立的操作，而任何比MS-DOS更复杂的东西都至少在某种程度上利用了这一点。

人们喜欢在“并发”和“并行”之间画出的漂亮、清晰的分界线根本不存在，而且几乎从来都不存在。人们喜欢归类为“并发”的东西通常仍然包含至少一种或更多不同类型的并行执行。他们喜欢归类为“并行”的内容通常涉及共享资源，(例如)一个进程在使用两个进程之间共享的资源时阻塞另一个进程的执行。

试图在“并行”和“并发”之间划清界限的人，其实是生活在一个从未真正存在过的计算机幻想中。

将原始问题解释为并行/并发计算，而不是编程。

在并发计算中，两个计算都是彼此独立前进的。第二个计算不需要等到第一个计算完成后才能继续进行。但是，它并没有说明这是如何实现的机制。在单核设置中，线程之间需要挂起和交替(也称为抢占式多线程)。

在并行计算中，两个计算同时进行——字面上是同时进行。这对于单CPU来说是不可能的，而是需要多核设置。

图片来自文章:“Node.js中的并行vs并发”

与

并发编程是一个通用概念，即一个程序可以以未定义的完成顺序执行多个任务，并且这些任务可以同时执行，也可以不同时执行。

并行编程只是一种并发编程，其中这些任务运行在同时执行的线程上。

我真的不理解这里许多过于冗长的回答，这些回答似乎暗示并行编程和并行编程是不同的编程方法，它们并不重叠。

如果你在写一个并行程序，根据定义，你是在写一个并发程序的特殊情况。这些年来，术语似乎被不必要地混淆和复杂化了。

关于并发编程最好、最详细的报道之一是Joe Duffy所著的《Windows上的并发编程》一书。这本书定义了并发，然后继续解释各种操作系统资源，库等可用来编写“并行”程序，如。net中的任务并行库。

第5页:

并行性是使用并发性将操作分解为 粒度更细的组成部分，以便独立的部分可以运行 机器上的独立处理器"

同样，并行编程只是一种特殊类型的并发编程，其中多个线程/任务将同时运行。

PS 我一直不喜欢在编程中，并发和并行这两个词有如此多的含义。例:在编程之外的广阔世界里，“篮球比赛将并行进行”和“篮球比赛将并行进行”是完全相同的。

想象一下，在开发者大会上，他们在第一天宣传会议将“并行”运行，但第二天他们将“并发”运行，这是多么可笑的困惑。那会很搞笑的!

在编程中，并发是独立的组合 执行进程，而并行是同时执行 计算的(可能相关的)。 -安德鲁·格兰德

And

Concurrency is the composition of independently executing computations. Concurrency is a way to structure software, particularly as a way to write clean code that interacts well with the real world. It is not parallelism. Concurrency is not parallelism, although it enables parallelism. If you have only one processor, your program can still be concurrent but it cannot be parallel. On the other hand, a well-written concurrent program might run efficiently in parallel on a multiprocessor. That property could be important... - Rob Pike -

为了理解其中的区别，我强烈建议你去看看Rob Pike(Golang的创作者之一)的视频。并发不是并行

https://joearms.github.io/published/2013-04-05-concurrent-and-parallel-programming.html

并发=两个队列和一台咖啡机。

并行=两个队列和两个咖啡机。