Analysis of the Enhanced Intel® Speedstep® Technology of The
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
AnalysisAnalysis ofof TheThe EnhancedEnhanced IntelIntel® SpeedstepSpeedstep® TechnologyTechnology ofof thethe PentiumPentium® MM ProcessorProcessor Efi Rotem, Avi Mendelson, Alon Naveh, Micha Moffie June 2004 MOBILE TECHNOLOGY OverviewOverview zz MobileMobile computerscomputers challengeschallenges Energy and Average power Thermal Design Power zz IntelIntel®® PentiumPentium®® MM powerpower managementmanagement zz TheThe experimentsexperiments zz TestTest resultsresults zz ConclusionsConclusions TACS June 2004 -2- OverviewOverview zz MobileMobile computerscomputers challengeschallenges Energy and Average power Thermal Design Power zz IntelIntel PentiumPentium MM powerpower managementmanagement zz TheThe experimentsexperiments zz TestTest resultsresults zz ConclusionsConclusions TACS June 2004 -3- PowerPower && DensityDensity increasesincreases z Think Watts/Cm2 Complex architecture at faster and smaller technology Denser power is harder to cool 1000 RocketRocket Nozzle NuclearNuclear ReactorReactor Nozzle 2 100 Pentium® 4 Centrino® Watts/cm Hot plate Pentium® III Pentium® II 10 Pentium® Pro i386 Pentium® i486 1 1.5µ 1µ 0.7µ 0.5µ 0.35µ 0.25µ 0.18µ 0.13µ 0.1µ 0.07µ * “New Microarchitecture Challenges in the Coming Generations of CMOS Process Technologies” – Fred Pollack, Intel Corp. Micro32 conference key note - 1999. TACS June 2004 -4- TheThe MobileMobile EnvironmentEnvironment zz MaximizeMaximize performanceperformance && featuresfeatures withinwithin givengiven constraintsconstraints Power / Thermal Size – form factor Noise Energy / Battery life etc. z MobileMobile platformsplatforms offeroffer TradeoffTradeoff preferencespreferences User defined or built-in scheme Compromise performance for longer battery life, lower acoustic noise, cool box etc. TACS June 2004 -5- OverviewOverview zz MobileMobile computerscomputers challengeschallenges Average power Thermal Design Power zz IntelIntel PentiumPentium MM powerpower managementmanagement zz TheThe experimentexperiment zz TestTest resultsresults zz ConclusionsConclusions TACS June 2004 -6- DieDie TemperatureTemperature measurementsmeasurements z Temperature based control mechanisms z A diode connected to an external A/D - reports temperature z Fixed temperature sensors Max spec junction temperature Critical temperature detector ref High# high n: diode ideality factor CR k: Boltzmann constant ref Critical# q: electron charge constant T: diode temperature (Kelvin) VBE: Voltage from base to emitter Ic : Collector current Is : Saturation current N: Ratio of collector currents Source current Measured Vbe A/D TACS June 2004 -7- ControllingControlling TDPTDP -- LinearLinear z P states and T states Trigger Temp. P>TDP Power Clock TACS June 2004 -8- ControllingControlling TDPTDP -- LinearLinear z Self or S/W trigger – Stop clock asserted, Power and temperature drop Trigger Temp. P>TDP Power Clock STOPCLK TACS June 2004 -9- ControllingControlling TDPTDP -- LinearLinear z STOPCLOCK continues toggling for a pre defined time z Average power and temperature drop – performance drops Trigger Thermal significant time Average Temperature Temp. P>TDP Power Average Power Reduced Clock STOPCLK TACS June 2004 -10- ControllingControlling TDPTDP -- LinearLinear z STOPCLOCK continues toggling for a pre defined time z Average power and temperature drop – performance drops Trigger Thermal significant time Average Temperature Temp. P>TDP Power Full Power Leakage Average Power Reduced Clock Linear dependency (<1:1) STOPCLK Power to Performance Energy = P*t Æ no gain Leakage impacts energy TACS June 2004 -11- DynamicDynamic VoltageVoltage ScalingScaling (DVS)(DVS) z One µ ARCH implementation – Power and energy control Switch Thermal or Utilization Clock Vcc Power TACS June 2004 -12- DynamicDynamic VoltageVoltage ScalingScaling (DVS)(DVS) z PLL relock at lower frequency at same Vcc z Fast change – no user experience impact Short time O.K with S/W Clock Vcc Power TACS June 2004 -13- DynamicDynamic VoltageVoltage ScalingScaling (DVS)(DVS) z Vcc drops gradually while CPU active z Power savings changes from linear to F3 Clock Performance drops by Vcc Function of F (Frequency) CPU power drops by Power P=C*V2*F @ function of F3 Power savings > time increase Energy net savings TACS June 2004 -14- DynamicDynamic VoltageVoltage ScalingScaling (DVS)(DVS) z Vcc is ramped up increasing power z Once stable – PLL relock at high frequency Switch Back Clock Vcc Power TACS June 2004 -15- AdaptiveAdaptive EnergyEnergy ControlControl zz ApplicationsApplications havehave widewide dynamicdynamic powerpower rangerange zz RequireRequire highhigh powerpower highhigh performanceperformance burstsbursts Determine user experience zz TradeTrade powerpower performanceperformance asas neededneeded Driven by Operating system ACPI Average power control on the fly - ADAPTIVE High High Low Low TACS June 2004 -16- ACPIACPI ControlControl z Operating system feature – Industry standard Supported by MS and Linux Passive and active policies defined for each zone User preference – Max performance or Max battery Switches _PSV and _ACx -95- _CRT DVS or clock throttling used for passive power control -90- Available Power states published by BIOS -85- -80- DVS and once reached min Vcc - linear -75- _AC0 Implements PD controller algorithm -70- -65- _AC1 Fan on/off and speed used for active cooling -60- _TMP = 60 -55- 1900 100 -50- _PSV 1700 90 -45- -40- 1500 80 -35- 1300 -30- 70 1100 -25- 60 900 Frequency 700 50 Temperature 500 40 8:56:59 8:57:42 8:58:25 8:59:08 8:59:51 9:00:35 TACS June 2004 -17- TACS June 2004 -18- TACS June 2004 -19- OverviewOverview zz MobileMobile computerscomputers challengeschallenges Average power Thermal Design Power zz IntelIntel PentiumPentium MM powerpower managementmanagement zz TheThe experimentexperiment zz TestTest resultsresults zz ConclusionsConclusions TACS June 2004 -20- TestTest SetupSetup Thermal control z CPU temperature is a function of power and ambient temp. Long time to heat the ambient and heat sink z Case temperature control formed stable environment Heating plate and fan to keep temperature at fixed temperature Force extreme conditions Test cases Fan z SPEC-Int and SPEC-FP components z Used the self trigger mechanism For repeatable & consistent results Controller z Collected power temperature and performance Tc Heating Die Plate Testing on real silicon the Tj Main Board - Mobile theoretical expected behavior TACS June 2004 -21- OverviewOverview zz MobileMobile computerscomputers challengeschallenges Average power Thermal Design Power zz IntelIntel PentiumPentium MM powerpower managementmanagement zz TheThe experimentexperiment zz TestTest resultsresults zz ConclusionsConclusions TACS June 2004 -22- LinealLineal vs.vs. DVSDVS controlcontrol Thermal Throttle impact 100% 99% Start Throttle 98% ~3% 97% 96% Linear 95% Higher temp. Less cooling DVS 94% SPEC2K Performance [ % of max ] 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% Cooling [% of max] TACS June 2004 -23- LinealLineal vs.vs. DVSDVS controlcontrol Thermal Throttle impact 100% 99% 98% ~3% 97% 96% Linear 95% Higher temp. Less cooling DVS SPEC2K Performance [ % ] 94% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% Cooling [% of max] TACS June 2004 -24- LinealLineal vs.vs. DVSDVS controlcontrol Thermal Throttle impact 100% Shallower Slope: 99% More cooling at same performance ~3% 98% ~3% ~4% 97% ~5% 96% ~6% Linear 95% Higher temp. Less cooling DVS SPEC2K Performance [ % ] 94% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% Cooling [% of max] TACS June 2004 -25- DVSDVS setset pointpoint Throttle impact on performance 100% throttle 100% Overheat 90% 600 Mhz 800 Mhz 80% 1000 Mhz 70% 1200 Mhz Performance [%] 60% 50% 50 60 70 80 90 100 Cooling [% of max] Optimal point (performance) is at the highest frequency that dose not accede Tj_max with no transitions up and down TACS June 2004 -26- AverageAverage PowerPower managementmanagement 1.2 216 200 1.1 1.0 0.8 150 112 0.6 48% Performance 100 66% Power 0.4 Efficiency 1:1.4 - Static 0.37 50 0.2. Mobile Mark 02 [Score] Average CPU Power [W] Lowest freq. 0 Average 0 Power 600 MHz 1600 MHz Score Power saving (Battery) Performance (AC) TACS June 2004 -27- AverageAverage PowerPower managementmanagement 1.2 216 200 1.1 1.0 195 10% Performance 0.8 150 43% Power Efficiency 1:4 112 0.6 48% Performance 0.63 100 66% Power 0.4 Efficiency 1:1.4 - Static 0.37 50 0.2. Mobile Mark 02 [Score] Average CPU Power [W] 0 Average 0 Power 600 MHz 600 – 1600 1600 MHz Score Power saving (Battery) ADAPTIVE Performance (AC) TACS June 2004 -28- EnergyEnergy efficiencyefficiency z Energy consumed for the SPEC-Int and SPEC-FP We measured energy as E=∫ P(t) ∫ t Energy consumed at 1600 MHz defined as 100% Energy efficiency Lowest energy at 100% lowest frequency 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% Relative Energyefficiency 20% 10% 0% 1600 1200 1000 800 600 Frequency [MHz] TACS June 2004 -29- OverviewOverview zz MobileMobile computerscomputers challengeschallenges Average power Thermal Design Power zz IntelIntel PentiumPentium MM powerpower managementmanagement zz TheThe experimentexperiment zz TestTest resultsresults zz ConclusionsConclusions TACS June 2004 -30- SummarySummary andand ConclusionsConclusions z Intel Pentium M Specifically designed for mobile Targeting energy and power efficiency z Mobile systems trade performance for power To meet user preference z Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology provides significantly improved power to performance and energy control scheme Silicon measurement confirm the theoretical work Optimal point for performance to power is at the highest frequency