ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Area and delay trade-offs in the circuit and architecture design of FPGAs
Full text PdfPdf (502 KB)
Source
International Symposium on Field Programmable Gate Arrays archive
Proceedings of the 16th international ACM/SIGDA symposium on Field programmable gate arrays table of contents
Monterey, California, USA
SESSION: Architecture tools table of contents
Pages 149-158  
Year of Publication: 2008
ISBN:978-1-59593-934-0
Authors
Ian Kuon  University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
Jonathan Rose  University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
Sponsors
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
SIGDA: ACM Special Interest Group on Design Automation
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 15,   Downloads (12 Months): 123,   Citation Count: 2
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1344671.1344695
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) are used in a wide range of markets that have differing cost, performance and power consumption requirements. It would be advantageous if a single device family could serve these varied needs but the economics of catering to this wide distribution of market demands suggest more than one family is appropriate. Consequently, FPGA vendors have moved to provide a more diverse set of families that sit at different points in the area-speed-power design space.

In this work, our goal is to understand the circuit and architectural design attributes of an FPGA that enable trade-offs between area and speed, and to determine the magnitude of the possible trade-offs. This will be useful for architects seeking to determine the number of device families in a suite of offerings, as well as the changes to make between families.

We have found that varying both architecture and transistor sizing of an FPGA allows the effective area to change by a factor of 3.6 from largest to smallest and the speed to change by a factor of 2.6 from fastest to slowest. It is interesting to observe that the range of area and delay trade-offs possible by varying only the transistor sizing of a single architecture is larger than the ranges observed in past architectural experiments. In addition to transistor size, we note that LUT size is one of the most useful parameters for trading off area and delay


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
E. Ahmed and J. Rose. The effect of LUT and cluster size on deep-submicron FPGA performance and density. IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems, 12(3):288--298, March 2004.
 
2
Altera Corporation. Stratix III device handbook, Nov 2006. ver 1.0.
 
3
Altera Corporation. Cyclone III device handbook, Sept 2007. ver. CIII5V1-1.2.
 
4
T. Bauer. Xilinx. Private Communication.
 
5
 
6
V. Betz and J. Rose. Circuit design, transistor sizing and wire layout of FPGA interconnect. In Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE Custom Integrated Circuits Conference, pages 171--174, 1999.
 
7
8
 
9
10
11
 
12
J.P. Fishburn and A. Dunlop. TILOS: A posynomial programming approach to transistor sizing. In International Conference on Computer Aided Design, pages 326--328, November 1985.
13
 
14
I. Kuon and J. Rose. Measuring the gap between FPGAs and ASICs. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, 26(2), 2007.
 
15
Lattice Semiconductor Corporation. LatticeECP2/M Family Handbook, Version 01.6, August 2007. http://www.latticesemi.com/dynamic/view_document.cfm?document_id=19028.
 
16
Lattice Semiconductor Corporation. LatticeECP2/M Family Handbook, Version 02.9, July 2007. http://www.latticesemi.com/dynamic/view_document.cfm?document_id=21733.
 
17
E. Lee, G. Lemieux, and S. Mirabbasi. Interconnect driver design for long wires in field-programmable gate arrays. In IEEE International Conference on Field Programmable Technology, pages 89--96, December 2006.
 
18
G. Lemieux, E. Lee, M. Tom, and A. Yu. Directional and single-driver wires in FPGA interconnect. In IEEE International Conference on Field-Programmable Technology, pages 41--48, December 2004.
19
20
 
21
F. Li, Y. Lin, L. He, D. Chen, and J. Cong. Power modeling and characteristics of field programmable gate arrays. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, 24(11):1712--1724, Nov. 2005.
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
J. Rubinstein, P. Penfield, and M.A. Horowitz. Signal delay in RC tree networks. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, 2(3):202--211, July 1983.
 
26
S.S. Sapatnekar, V.B. Rao, P. Vaidya, and K. Sung-Mo. An exact solution to the transistor sizing problem for CMOS circuits using convex optimization. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, 12(11):1621--1634, November 1993.
 
27
STMicroelectronics. 90nm CMOS090 Design Platform, 2005. http://www.st.com/stonline/products/technologies/soc/90plat.htm.
 
28
 
29
Synopsys. HSPICE. http://www.synopsys.com/products/mixedsignal/hspice/hspice.html.
 
30
Synopsys. NanoSim. http://www.synopsys.com/products/mixedsignal/nanosim/nanosim.html.
 
31
Xilinx. Spartan-3e, November 2006. Ver. 3.4.
 
32
Xilinx. Virtex-5 user guide, October 2006. UG190 (v2.1).
 
33
S. Yang. Logic synthesis and optimization benchmarks user guide version 3.0. Technical report, Microelectronics Center of North Carolina, Jan 1991.
 
34
S.P. Young, T.J. Bauer, K. Chaudhary, and S. Krishnamurthy. FPGA repeatable interconnect structure with bidirectional and unidirectional interconnect lines, Aug 1999. US Patent 5,942,913.