Do Newer Lightweight CNNs Perform Better Under Resource Constraints? A Controlled Multigenerational Study of Architecture, Initialization, Training Budget, and Efficiency

arXiv:2607.01984v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Newer lightweight convolutional neural networks are often presented as improving predictive performance and deployment efficiency, but such claims require controlled evaluation. This study compares nine lightweight CNN model packages across CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and Tiny ImageNet under a shared downstream protocol. We report top-1 accuracy, macro F1, top-5 accuracy, parameter count, FP32 storage, GMACs, batch-size-1 latency on an NVIDIA L4 and AMD Ryzen 5 5500U CPU, peak PyTorch CUDA allocated tensor memory, and point estimate Pareto frontiers. EfficientNetV2-S achieves the highest observed top-1 accuracy on CIFAR-10 and CIFAR-100 at 97.57% and 86.98%, while RepViT-M1.0 leads Tiny ImageNet at 79.87%. EfficientNet-B0 remains within 0.22, 0.85, and 1.79 percentage points of the best result on the three datasets while using approximately 79% fewer parameters and 86% fewer GMACs than EfficientNetV2-S. It also appears on every evaluated accuracy and resource Pareto frontier, making it the most consistently competitive intermediate-budget option. MobileNetV3-Small has the lowest GMAC count, is the fastest model under both CPU thread settings, and records higher observed accuracy than MobileNetV4-Conv-S on all three datasets. Under random initialization, it leads MobileNetV4-Conv-S by 2.55, 1.76, and 0.99 points, with paired test-set intervals excluding zero for the fixed trained models. EfficientNet-B0 remains 3.29, 10.10, and 17.54 points below its pretrained counterpart after 100 epochs of scratch training, despite requiring about five times the recorded training time. SqueezeNet1.1 has the fewest parameters and lowest peak CUDA allocation, but substantially weaker accuracy. Latency rankings differ sharply between the L4 and CPU environments, showing that GMACs alone do not predict measured inference performance. Overall, newer designs provide selective rather than universal gains