ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
A design space evaluation of grid processor architectures
Full text Publisher SitePublisher Site PdfPdf (1.29 MB)
Source International Symposium on Microarchitecture archive
Proceedings of the 34th annual ACM/IEEE international symposium on Microarchitecture table of contents
Austin, Texas
SESSION: Novel ideas table of contents
Pages: 40 - 51  
Year of Publication: 2001
ISBN ~ ISSN:1072-4451 , 0-7695-1369-7
Authors
Ramadass Nagarajan  The University of Texas, Austin
Karthikeyan Sankaralingam  The University of Texas, Austin
Doug Burger  The University of Texas, Austin
Stephen W. Keckler  The University of Texas, Austin
Sponsors
: IEEE TC-MARCH
SIGMICRO: ACM Special Interest Group on Microarchitectural Research and Processing
Publisher
IEEE Computer Society  Washington, DC, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 2,   Downloads (12 Months): 36,   Citation Count: 34
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   collaborative colleagues   peer to peer  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
Save this Article to a Binder    Display Formats: BibTex  EndNote ACM Ref   

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we survey the design space of a new class of architectures called Grid Processor Architectures (GPAs). These architectures are designed to scale with technology, allowing faster clock rates than conventional architectures while providing superior instruction-level parallelism on traditional workloads and high performance across a range of application classes. A GPA consists of an array of ALUs, each with limited control, connected by a thin operand network. Programs are executed by mapping blocks of statically scheduled instructions to the ALU array and executing them dynamically in dataflow order. This organization enables the critical paths of instruction blocks to be executed on chains of ALUs without transmitting temporary values back to the register file, avoiding most of the large, unscalable structures that limit the scalability of conventional architectures. Finally, we present simulation results of a preliminary design, the GPA-1. With a half-cycle routing delay, we obtain performance roughly equal to an ideal 8-way, 512-entry window superscalar core. With no inter-ALU delay, perfect memory, and perfect branch prediction, the IPC of the GPA-1 is more than twice that of the ideal superscalar core, achieving an average of 11 IPC across nine SPEC CPU2000 and Mediabench benchmarks.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
 
2
3
 
4
D. Burger and T. M. Austin. The SimpleScalar tool set version 2.0. Technical Report 1342, Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, June 1997.
 
5
H. Corporaal. Transport Triggered Architectures. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, September 1995.
6
7
 
8
9
10
 
11
 
12
G. Hinton, D. Sager, M. Upton, D. Boggs, D. Carmean, A. Kyker, and P. Roussel. The microarchitecture of the Pentium 4 processor, Intel Technology Journal QI, 2001.
 
13
 
14
 
15
16
17
 
18
L. Peh and W. J. Dally. Flit-reservation flow control. In Proceedings of 6th International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture, pages 73-84, January 2000.
19
 
20
 
21
 
22
The national technology roadmap for semiconductors. Semiconductor Industry Association, 1999.
 
23
24
 
25
M. B. Taylor, J. Kim, J. Miller, F. Ghodrat, B. Greenwald, P. Johnson, W. Lee, A. Ma, N. Shnidman, V. Strumpen, D. Wentzlaff, M. Frank, S. Amarasinghe, and A. Agarwal. The Raw processor - a scalable 32-bit fabric for embedded and general purpose computing. In Proceedings of Hot Chips XIII, August 2001.
 
26
Trimaran : An infrastructure for research in instruction-level parallelism, http://www.trimaran.org.
 
27
A. K. Uht, D. Morano, A. Khalafi, M. de Alba, T. Wenisch, M. Ashouei, and D. Kaeli. IPC in the 10's via resource flow computing with Levo. Technical Report 092001-001, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, September 2001.
28
 
29

CITED BY  34
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Collaborative Colleagues:
Ramadass Nagarajan: colleagues
Karthikeyan Sankaralingam: colleagues
Doug Burger: colleagues
Stephen W. Keckler: colleagues

Peer to Peer - Readers of this Article have also read: