DOCSLIB.ORG

Integrated Circuits, Performance, Power

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Integrated Circuits, Performance, Power Integrated Circuits, Performance, Power Alexander Nelson January 15, 2021 University of Arkansas - Department of Computer Science and Computer Engineering Integrated Circuits Technologies Over Time 1 Transistors and Integrated Circuits Transistors { On/Off Switch controlled by electric signal Integrated Circuit { Many transistors in a single chip VLSI/ULSI { Containing thousands/millions/billions of transistors Intel 8080 (1974) { 6,000 Transistors AMD Ryzen 9 3900X (2019) { 9.89B Transistors 45 years = 16,483,333 times more transistors 2 Semiconductors Semiconductor { Solid substance with conductivity between insulator and conductor Silicon { Natural semiconductor Can be chemically modified to be: • Conductor • Insulator • Areas that can conduct or insulate as a switch 3 Manufacturing Process Yield { Proportion of working dies per wafer 4 Intel Core i7 Wafer 300mm wafer, 280 chips, 32nm technology Each chip is 20.7 x 10.5nm 5 Integrated Circuit Cost Nonlinear relation to area and defect rate • Wafer cost and area are fixed • Defect rate determined by manufacturing process • Die area determined by architecture & circuit design 6 Performance How do you define CPU performance? 6 Example Which airplane has the best performance? 7 Response Time vs. Throughput Response Time { How long to finish a task Throughput { Total work done per unit time • e.g. tasks/transaction per hour How are these two metrics affected by: • Replacing processor with faster version? • Adding more processors? 8 Relative Performance If Performance defined as: 1 Performance = ExecutionTime Then: PerformanceX = Execution TimeY = n PerformanceY Execution TimeX Can be phrased as \Processor X is n times faster than Processor Y" 9 Relative Performance If Performance defined as: 1 Performance = ExecutionTime Then: PerformanceX = Execution TimeY = n PerformanceY Execution TimeX Can be phrased as \Processor X is n times faster than Processor Y" Example: Assume a program runs in: • 10s on Processor A • 15s on Processor B Then: Execution TimeY = 15 = 1:5 Execution TimeX 10 So, A is 1.5 times faster than B 10 Execution Time How do you measure execution time? Elapsed Realtime { Total response time including all aspects • Processing, I/O, OS overhead, idle time Determines system performance CPU Time { Time spent processing a given job • Discounts I/O time, other jobs' shares Comprises user CPU time & system CPU time Different programs affected differently by CPU & system performance 11 CPU Clocking Nearly all CPU governed by clock Clock Period { Duration of a clock cycle (in seconds) Clock Frequency { # of clock cycles per second (in hertz) 12 CPU Time CPU Time can be defined as: CPU Clock Cycles CPUTime = CPUClockCycles×ClockCycleTime = Clock Rate How to improve performance? • Reduce number of clock cycles per operation or per program • Increase clock rate Hardware designer may need to trade off clock rate with cycle count 13 CPU Time Example Example: Computer A: 2GHz Clock Frequency results in 10s CPU Time Design Computer B such that: • Aiming for 6s CPU Time • May increase clock frequency, but causes 1.2X clock cycles 14 CPU Time Example Example: Computer A: 2GHz Clock Frequency results in 10s CPU Time Design Computer B such that: • Aiming for 6s CPU Time • May increase clock frequency, but causes 1.2X clock cycles Clock CyclesB 1:2×Clock CyclesA Clock RateB = = CPU TimeB 6s 9 ClockCyclesA = CPUTimeA×ClockRateA = 10s×2GHz = 20×10 1:2×20×109 24×109 Clock RateB = 6s = 6s = 4GHz 15 Instruction Counts and CPI Clock Cycles = Instruction Count × Cycles Per Instruction CPU Time = Instruction Count × CPI × Clock Cycle Time Instruction Count×CPI CPU Time = Clock Rate Instruction Count { Number of instructions for a particular program Depends on: • Program • ISA • Compiler Average Cycles Per Instruction { Determined by ISA/CPU Hardware Different instructions may have different CPI Average CPI affected by % of instruction classes in program 16 CPI Example Computer A { Cycle Time = 250ps, CPI = 2.0 Computer B { Cycle Time = 500ps, CPI = 1.2 Same ISA Which is faster? By how much? 17 CPI Example A is faster by 1.2 times relative performance 18 CPI in Detail Different instruction classes take different # of cycles Pn Clock Cycles = i=1(CPIi × Instruction Counti ) Weighted Average CPI: Clock Cycles Pn Instruction Counti CPI = Instruction Count = i=1(CPIi × Instruction Count ) The sum is the relative frequency of each class of instruction 19 CPI Example 20 Performance Summary Performance Depends on: • Algorithm { Affects instruction count, possibly CPI • Programming language { Affects instruction count & CPI • Compiler { Affects instruction count & CPI • ISA { Affects instruction count, CPI, & Time per cycle Instructions Clock Cycles Seconds CPU Time = Program × Instruction × ClockCycle 21 Power Power Trends Intel Core i5-9400 9th Gen (2019) { 14nm, 2.90-4.1 GHz, 65W 22 Why isn't clock frequency continuing to increase? 22 Battery Life Isn't Keeping Up 23 Dynamic Power Consumption CMOS Transistors { complementary metal oxide semiconductor Best performance per watt since 1976 Gradually being replaced by FinFET technology (can go <20nm) Primary energy consumption is dynamic energy 1 2 Energy / 2 × Capacitive Load × Voltage × Frequency Switched Reducing voltage from 5V!1V allowed increase of 1000x clock frequency with only 30x gain in power consumption 24 Reducing Power Suppose a new CPU has: • 85% capacitive load of old CPU • 15% voltage and 15% frequency reduction 2 Pnew Cold ×0:85×(Vold ×0:85) ×Fold ×0:85 4 Then: P = 2 = 0:85 = 0:52 old Cold ×Vold ×Fold The new CPU uses 52% of the power of the old CPU However: • Can't reduce voltage further • Can't remove more heat How else can we improve performance? 25 Uniprocessor Performance Since 2003, constrained by power, instruction-level parallelism, memory latency 26 Multiprocessors Multicore Microprocessors { More than one processor per chip Requires explicitly parallel programming • Compare with instruction level parallelism • Hardware executes multiple instructions at once • Hidden from the programmer! • Hard to do • Programming for performance • Load balancing • Optimizing Communication and synchronization 27 Benchmarking Processors SPEC { System Performance Evaluation Cooperative { Funded by computer vendors for standard set of benchmarks SPECINTC2006 benchmarks on 2.66 GHz Intel Core i7 920 28 SPEC Power Benchmark Power consumption of a server at different workload levels • Performance: ssj ops/sec • Power: Watts (Joules/sec) P10 P10 Overall ssj ops per Watt = ( i=0 ssj opsi ) ÷ ( i=0 poweri ) 29 Power SPEC SPECpower ssj2008 for Xeon X5650 30 Pitfall: Amdahl's Law Improving one aspect does not guarantee a proportional improvement in overall performance Amdahl's Law: Taffected Timproved = improvement factor + Tunaffected Example: Multiply accounts for 80/100 seconds of execution How much improvement in multiply performance to get 5x improvement? 31 Pitfall: Amdahl's Law Improving one aspect does not guarantee a proportional improvement in overall performance Amdahl's Law: Taffected Timproved = improvement factor + Tunaffected Example: Multiply accounts for 80/100 seconds of execution How much improvement in multiply performance to get 5x improvement? 80 20 = n + 20 { Can't be done! Corollary: Make the common case fast! 32.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Accelerating HPL Using the Intel Xeon Phi 7120P Coprocessors
    Accelerating HPL using the Intel Xeon Phi 7120P Coprocessors Authors: Saeed Iqbal and Deepthi Cherlopalle The Intel Xeon Phi Series can be used to accelerate HPC applications in the C4130. The highly parallel architecture on Phi Coprocessors can boost the parallel applications. These coprocessors work seamlessly with the standard Xeon E5 processors series to provide additional parallel hardware to boost parallel applications. A key benefit of the Xeon Phi series is that these don’t require redesigning the application, only compiler directives are required to be able to use the Xeon Phi coprocessor. Fundamentally, the Intel Xeon series are many-core parallel processors, with each core having a dedicated L2 cache. The cores are connected through a bi-directional ring interconnects. Intel offers a complete set of development, performance monitoring and tuning tools through its Parallel Studio and VTune. The goal is to enable HPC users to get advantage from the parallel hardware with minimal changes to the code. The Xeon Phi has two modes of operation, the offload mode and native mode. In the offload mode designed parts of the application are “offloaded” to the Xeon Phi, if available in the server. Required code and data is copied from a host to the coprocessor, processing is done parallel in the Phi coprocessor and results move back to the host. There are two kinds of offload modes, non-shared and virtual-shared memory modes. Each offload mode offers different levels of user control on data movement to and from the coprocessor and incurs different types of overheads. In the native mode, the application runs on both host and Xeon Phi simultaneously, communication required data among themselves as need.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1: Computer Abstractions and Technology 1.6 – 1.7: Performance and Power
    Chapter 1: Computer Abstractions and Technology 1.6 – 1.7: Performance and power ITSC 3181 Introduction to Computer Architecture https://passlaB.githuB.io/ITSC3181/ Department of Computer Science Yonghong Yan [email protected] https://passlab.github.io/yanyh/ Lectures for Chapter 1 and C Basics Computer Abstractions and Technology • Lecture 01: Chapter 1 – 1.1 – 1.4: Introduction, great ideas, Moore’s law, aBstraction, computer components, and program execution • Lecture 02: C Basics; Memory and Binary Systems • Lecture 03: Number System, Compilation, Assembly, Linking and Program Execution ☛• Lecture 04: Chapter 1 – 1.6 – 1.7: Performance, power and technology trends • Lecture 05: – 1.8 - 1.9: Multiprocessing and Benchmarking 2 § 1.6 Performance 1.6 Defining Performance • Which airplane has the best performance? Boeing 777 Boeing 777 Boeing 747 Boeing 747 BAC/Sud BAC/Sud Concorde Concorde Douglas Douglas DC- DC-8-50 8-50 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Passenger Capacity Cruising Range (miles) Boeing 777 Boeing 777 Boeing 747 Boeing 747 BAC/Sud BAC/Sud Concorde Concorde Douglas Douglas DC- DC-8-50 8-50 0 500 1000 1500 0 100000 200000 300000 400000 Cruising Speed (mph) Passengers x mph 3 Response Time and Throughput • Response time çè Latency – How long it takes to do a task • Throughput çè Bandwidth – Total work done per unit time • e.g., tasks/transactions/… per hour • How are response time and throughput affected by – Replacing the processor with a faster version? – Adding more processors? • We’ll focus on response time for now… 4 Relative Performance • Define Performance = 1/Execution Time • “X is n time faster than Y”, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • 45-Year CPU Evolution: One Law and Two Equations
    45-year CPU evolution: one law and two equations Daniel Etiemble LRI-CNRS University Paris Sud Orsay, France [email protected] Abstract— Moore’s law and two equations allow to explain the a) IC is the instruction count. main trends of CPU evolution since MOS technologies have been b) CPI is the clock cycles per instruction and IPC = 1/CPI is the used to implement microprocessors. Instruction count per clock cycle. c) Tc is the clock cycle time and F=1/Tc is the clock frequency. Keywords—Moore’s law, execution time, CM0S power dissipation. The Power dissipation of CMOS circuits is the second I. INTRODUCTION equation (2). CMOS power dissipation is decomposed into static and dynamic powers. For dynamic power, Vdd is the power A new era started when MOS technologies were used to supply, F is the clock frequency, ΣCi is the sum of gate and build microprocessors. After pMOS (Intel 4004 in 1971) and interconnection capacitances and α is the average percentage of nMOS (Intel 8080 in 1974), CMOS became quickly the leading switching capacitances: α is the activity factor of the overall technology, used by Intel since 1985 with 80386 CPU. circuit MOS technologies obey an empirical law, stated in 1965 and 2 Pd = Pdstatic + α x ΣCi x Vdd x F (2) known as Moore’s law: the number of transistors integrated on a chip doubles every N months. Fig. 1 presents the evolution for II. CONSEQUENCES OF MOORE LAW DRAM memories, processors (MPU) and three types of read- only memories [1]. The growth rate decreases with years, from A.
    [Show full text]
  • Intel Cirrascale and Petrobras Case Study
    Case Study Intel® Xeon Phi™ Coprocessor Intel® Xeon® Processor E5 Family Big Data Analytics High-Performance Computing Energy Accelerating Energy Exploration with Intel® Xeon Phi™ Coprocessors Cirrascale delivers scalable performance by combining its innovative PCIe switch riser with Intel® processors and coprocessors To find new oil and gas reservoirs, organizations are focusing exploration in the deep sea and in complex geological formations. As energy companies such as Petrobras work to locate and map those reservoirs, they need powerful IT resources that can process multiple iterations of seismic models and quickly deliver precise results. IT solution provider Cirrascale began building systems with Intel® Xeon Phi™ coprocessors to provide the scalable performance Petrobras and other customers need while holding down costs. Challenges • Enable deep-sea exploration. Improve reservoir mapping accuracy with detailed seismic processing. • Accelerate performance of seismic applications. Speed time to results while controlling costs. • Improve scalability. Enable server performance and density to scale as data volumes grow and workloads become more demanding. Solution • Custom Cirrascale servers with Intel Xeon Phi coprocessors. Employ new compute blades with the Intel® Xeon® processor E5 family and Intel Xeon Phi coprocessors. Cirrascale uses custom PCIe switch risers for fast, peer-to-peer communication among coprocessors. Technology Results • Linear scaling. Performance increases linearly as Intel Xeon Phi coprocessors “Working together, the are added to the system. Intel® Xeon® processors • Simplified development model. Developers no longer need to spend time optimizing data placement. and Intel® Xeon Phi™ coprocessors help Business Value • Faster, better analysis. More detailed and accurate modeling in less time HPC applications shed improves oil and gas exploration.
    [Show full text]
  • Cuda C Best Practices Guide
    CUDA C BEST PRACTICES GUIDE DG-05603-001_v9.0 | June 2018 Design Guide TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface............................................................................................................ vii What Is This Document?..................................................................................... vii Who Should Read This Guide?...............................................................................vii Assess, Parallelize, Optimize, Deploy.....................................................................viii Assess........................................................................................................ viii Parallelize.................................................................................................... ix Optimize...................................................................................................... ix Deploy.........................................................................................................ix Recommendations and Best Practices.......................................................................x Chapter 1. Assessing Your Application.......................................................................1 Chapter 2. Heterogeneous Computing.......................................................................2 2.1. Differences between Host and Device................................................................ 2 2.2. What Runs on a CUDA-Enabled Device?...............................................................3 Chapter 3. Application Profiling.............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Soft Machines Targets Ipcbottleneck
    SOFT MACHINES TARGETS IPC BOTTLENECK New CPU Approach Boosts Performance Using Virtual Cores By Linley Gwennap (October 27, 2014) ................................................................................................................... Coming out of stealth mode at last week’s Linley Pro- president/CTO Mohammad Abdallah. Investors include cessor Conference, Soft Machines disclosed a new CPU AMD, GlobalFoundries, and Samsung as well as govern- technology that greatly improves performance on single- ment investment funds from Abu Dhabi (Mubdala), Russia threaded applications. The new VISC technology can con- (Rusnano and RVC), and Saudi Arabia (KACST and vert a single software thread into multiple virtual threads, Taqnia). Its board of directors is chaired by Global Foun- which it can then divide across multiple physical cores. dries CEO Sanjay Jha and includes legendary entrepreneur This conversion happens inside the processor hardware Gordon Campbell. and is thus invisible to the application and the software Soft Machines hopes to license the VISC technology developer. Although this capability may seem impossible, to other CPU-design companies, which could add it to Soft Machines has demonstrated its performance advan- their existing CPU cores. Because its fundamental benefit tage using a test chip that implements a VISC design. is better IPC, VISC could aid a range of applications from Without VISC, the only practical way to improve single-thread performance is to increase the parallelism Application (sequential code) (instructions per cycle, or IPC) of the CPU microarchi- Single Thread tecture. Taken to the extreme, this approach results in massive designs such as Intel’s Haswell and IBM’s Power8 OS and Hypervisor that deliver industry-leading performance but waste power Standard ISA and die area.
    [Show full text]
  • Power Measurement Tutorial for the Green500 List
    Power Measurement Tutorial for the Green500 List R. Ge, X. Feng, H. Pyla, K. Cameron, W. Feng June 27, 2007 Contents 1 The Metric for Energy-Efficiency Evaluation 1 2 How to Obtain P¯(Rmax)? 2 2.1 The Definition of P¯(Rmax)...................................... 2 2.2 Deriving P¯(Rmax) from Unit Power . 2 2.3 Measuring Unit Power . 3 3 The Measurement Procedure 3 3.1 Equipment Check List . 4 3.2 Software Installation . 4 3.3 Hardware Connection . 4 3.4 Power Measurement Procedure . 5 4 Appendix 6 4.1 Frequently Asked Questions . 6 4.2 Resources . 6 1 The Metric for Energy-Efficiency Evaluation This tutorial serves as a practical guide for measuring the computer system power that is required as part of a Green500 submission. It describes the basic procedures to be followed in order to measure the power consumption of a supercomputer. A supercomputer that appears on The TOP500 List can easily consume megawatts of electric power. This power consumption may lead to operating costs that exceed acquisition costs as well as intolerable system failure rates. In recent years, we have witnessed an increasingly stronger movement towards energy-efficient computing systems in academia, government, and industry. Thus, the purpose of the Green500 List is to provide a ranking of the most energy-efficient supercomputers in the world and serve as a complementary view to the TOP500 List. However, as pointed out in [1, 2], identifying a single objective metric for energy efficiency in supercom- puters is a difficult task. Based on [1, 2] and given the already existing use of the “performance per watt” metric, the Green500 List uses “performance per watt” (PPW) as its metric to rank the energy efficiency of supercomputers.
    [Show full text]
  • Clock Rate Improves Roughly Proportional to Improvement in L • Number of Transistors Improves Proportional to L2 (Or Faster)
    TheThe VonVon NeumannNeumann ComputerComputer ModelModel • Partitioning of the computing engine into components: – Central Processing Unit (CPU): Control Unit (instruction decode , sequencing of operations), Datapath (registers, arithmetic and logic unit, buses). – Memory: Instruction and operand storage. – Input/Output (I/O) sub-system: I/O bus, interfaces, devices. – The stored program concept: Instructions from an instruction set are fetched from a common memory and executed one at a time Control Input Memory - (instructions, data) Datapath registers Output ALU, buses Computer System CPU I/O Devices EECC551 - Shaaban #1 Lec # 1 Winter 2001 12-3-2001 Generic CPU Machine Instruction Execution Steps Instruction Obtain instruction from program storage Fetch Instruction Determine required actions and instruction size Decode Operand Locate and obtain operand data Fetch Execute Compute result value or status Result Deposit results in storage for later use Store Next Determine successor or next instruction Instruction EECC551 - Shaaban #2 Lec # 1 Winter 2001 12-3-2001 HardwareHardware ComponentsComponents ofof AnyAny ComputerComputer Five classic components of all computers: 1. Control Unit; 2. Datapath; 3. Memory; 4. Input; 5. Output } Processor Computer Keyboard, Mouse, etc. Processor Memory Devices (active) (passive) Control Input (where Unit programs, data Disk Datapath live when Output running) Display, Printer, etc. EECC551 - Shaaban #3 Lec # 1 Winter 2001 12-3-2001 CPUCPU OrganizationOrganization • Datapath Design: – Capabilities & performance characteristics of principal Functional Units (FUs): • (e.g., Registers, ALU, Shifters, Logic Units, ...) – Ways in which these components are interconnected (buses connections, multiplexors, etc.). – How information flows between components. • Control Unit Design: – Logic and means by which such information flow is controlled. – Control and coordination of FUs operation to realize the targeted Instruction Set Architecture to be implemented (can either be implemented using a finite state machine or a microprogram).
    [Show full text]
  • Towards Better Performance Per Watt in Virtual Environments on Asymmetric Single-ISA Multi-Core Systems
    Towards Better Performance Per Watt in Virtual Environments on Asymmetric Single-ISA Multi-core Systems Viren Kumar Alexandra Fedorova Simon Fraser University Simon Fraser University 8888 University Dr 8888 University Dr Vancouver, Canada Vancouver, Canada [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT performance per watt than homogeneous multicore proces- Single-ISA heterogeneous multicore architectures promise to sors. As power consumption in data centers becomes a grow- deliver plenty of cores with varying complexity, speed and ing concern [3], deploying ASISA multicore systems is an performance in the near future. Virtualization enables mul- increasingly attractive opportunity. These systems perform tiple operating systems to run concurrently as distinct, in- at their best if application workloads are assigned to het- dependent guest domains, thereby reducing core idle time erogeneous cores in consideration of their runtime proper- and maximizing throughput. This paper seeks to identify a ties [4][13][12][18][24][21]. Therefore, understanding how to heuristic that can aid in intelligently scheduling these vir- schedule data-center workloads on ASISA systems is an im- tualized workloads to maximize performance while reducing portant problem. This paper takes the first step towards power consumption. understanding the properties of data center workloads that determine how they should be scheduled on ASISA multi- We propose that the controlling domain in a Virtual Ma- core processors. Since virtual machine technology is a de chine Monitor or hypervisor is relatively insensitive to changes facto standard for data centers, we study virtual machine in core frequency, and thus scheduling it on a slower core (VM) workloads. saves power while only slightly affecting guest domain per- formance.
    [Show full text]
  • Atmega165p Datasheet
    Features • High Performance, Low Power Atmel® AVR® 8-Bit Microcontroller • Advanced RISC Architecture – 130 Powerful Instructions – Most Single Clock Cycle Execution – 32 × 8 General Purpose Working Registers – Fully Static Operation – Up to 16 MIPS Throughput at 16 MHz – On-Chip 2-cycle Multiplier • High Endurance Non-volatile Memory segments – 16 Kbytes of In-System Self-programmable Flash program memory – 512 Bytes EEPROM – 1 Kbytes Internal SRAM 8-bit – Write/Erase cyles: 10,000 Flash/100,000 EEPROM(1)(3) – Data retention: 20 years at 85°C/100 years at 25°C(2)(3) Microcontroller – Optional Boot Code Section with Independent Lock Bits In-System Programming by On-chip Boot Program with 16K Bytes True Read-While-Write Operation – Programming Lock for Software Security In-System • JTAG (IEEE std. 1149.1 compliant) Interface – Boundary-scan Capabilities According to the JTAG Standard Programmable – Extensive On-chip Debug Support – Programming of Flash, EEPROM, Fuses, and Lock Bits through the JTAG Interface Flash • Peripheral Features – Two 8-bit Timer/Counters with Separate Prescaler and Compare Mode – One 16-bit Timer/Counter with Separate Prescaler, Compare Mode, and Capture Mode – Real Time Counter with Separate Oscillator –Four PWM Channels ATmega165P – 8-channel, 10-bit ADC – Programmable Serial USART ATmega165PV – Master/Slave SPI Serial Interface – Universal Serial Interface with Start Condition Detector – Programmable Watchdog Timer with Separate On-chip Oscillator – On-chip Analog Comparator Preliminary – Interrupt and Wake-up
    [Show full text]
  • Computer Architecture Out-Of-Order Execution
    Computer Architecture Out-of-order Execution By Yoav Etsion With acknowledgement to Dan Tsafrir, Avi Mendelson, Lihu Rappoport, and Adi Yoaz 1 Computer Architecture 2013– Out-of-Order Execution The need for speed: Superscalar • Remember our goal: minimize CPU Time CPU Time = duration of clock cycle × CPI × IC • So far we have learned that in order to Minimize clock cycle ⇒ add more pipe stages Minimize CPI ⇒ utilize pipeline Minimize IC ⇒ change/improve the architecture • Why not make the pipeline deeper and deeper? Beyond some point, adding more pipe stages doesn’t help, because Control/data hazards increase, and become costlier • (Recall that in a pipelined CPU, CPI=1 only w/o hazards) • So what can we do next? Reduce the CPI by utilizing ILP (instruction level parallelism) We will need to duplicate HW for this purpose… 2 Computer Architecture 2013– Out-of-Order Execution A simple superscalar CPU • Duplicates the pipeline to accommodate ILP (IPC > 1) ILP=instruction-level parallelism • Note that duplicating HW in just one pipe stage doesn’t help e.g., when having 2 ALUs, the bottleneck moves to other stages IF ID EXE MEM WB • Conclusion: Getting IPC > 1 requires to fetch/decode/exe/retire >1 instruction per clock: IF ID EXE MEM WB 3 Computer Architecture 2013– Out-of-Order Execution Example: Pentium Processor • Pentium fetches & decodes 2 instructions per cycle • Before register file read, decide on pairing Can the two instructions be executed in parallel? (yes/no) u-pipe IF ID v-pipe • Pairing decision is based… On data
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing the Power and Performance of Intel's SCC to State
    Comparing the Power and Performance of Intel’s SCC to State-of-the-Art CPUs and GPUs Ehsan Totoni, Babak Behzad, Swapnil Ghike, Josep Torrellas Department of Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA E-mail: ftotoni2, bbehza2, ghike2, [email protected] Abstract—Power dissipation and energy consumption are be- A key architectural challenge now is how to support in- coming increasingly important architectural design constraints in creasing parallelism and scale performance, while being power different types of computers, from embedded systems to large- and energy efficient. There are multiple options on the table, scale supercomputers. To continue the scaling of performance, it is essential that we build parallel processor chips that make the namely “heavy-weight” multi-cores (such as general purpose best use of exponentially increasing numbers of transistors within processors), “light-weight” many-cores (such as Intel’s Single- the power and energy budgets. Intel SCC is an appealing option Chip Cloud Computer (SCC) [1]), low-power processors (such for future many-core architectures. In this paper, we use various as embedded processors), and SIMD-like highly-parallel archi- scalable applications to quantitatively compare and analyze tectures (such as General-Purpose Graphics Processing Units the performance, power consumption and energy efficiency of different cutting-edge platforms that differ in architectural build. (GPGPUs)). These platforms include the Intel Single-Chip Cloud Computer The Intel SCC [1] is a research chip made by Intel Labs (SCC) many-core, the Intel Core i7 general-purpose multi-core, to explore future many-core architectures. It has 48 Pentium the Intel Atom low-power processor, and the Nvidia ION2 (P54C) cores in 24 tiles of two cores each.
    [Show full text]