ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Clock rate versus IPC: the end of the road for conventional microarchitectures
Full text PdfPdf (208 KB)
Source ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News archive
Volume 28 ,  Issue 2  (May 2000) table of contents
Special Issue: Proceedings of the 27th annual international symposium on Computer architecture (ISCA '00)
Pages: 248 - 259  
Year of Publication: 2000
ISSN:0163-5964
Also published in ...
Authors
Vikas Agarwal  Computer Architecture and Technology Laboratory, Department of Computer Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin
M. S. Hrishikesh  Computer Architecture and Technology Laboratory, Department of Computer Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin
Stephen W. Keckler  Computer Architecture and Technology Laboratory, Department of Computer Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin
Doug Burger  Computer Architecture and Technology Laboratory, Department of Computer Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 17,   Downloads (12 Months): 139,   Citation Count: 126
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/342001.339691
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

The doubling of microprocessor performance every three years has been the result of two factors: more transistors per chip and superlinear scali ng of the processor clock with technology generation. Our results show that, due to both diminishing improvements in clock rates and poor wire scaling as semiconductor devices shrink, the achievable performance growth of conventional microarchitectures will slow substantially. In this paper, we describe technology-driven models for wire capacitance, wire delay, and microarchitectural component delay. Using the results of these models, we measure the simulated performance—estimating both clock rate and IPC —of an aggressive out-of-order microarchitecture as it is scaled from a 250nm technology to a 35nm technology. We perform this analysis for three clock scaling targets and two microarchitecture scaling strategies: pipeline scaling and capacity scaling. We find that no scaling strategy permits annual performance improvements of better than 12.5%, which is far worse than the annual 50-60% to which we have grown accustomed.


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
Vikas Agarwal, Stephen W. Keckler, and Doug Burger. Scaling of microarchitectural structures in future process technologies. Technical Report TR2000-02, Department of Computer Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, April 2000.
2
 
3
B.S. Amrutur and M.A. Horowitz. Speed and power scaling of SRAMs. IEEE Journal of Solid State Circuits, 35(2): 175-185, February 2000.
 
4
Geordie Braceras, Alan Roberts, John Connor, Reid Wistort, Terry Frederick, Marcel Robillard, Stu Hall, Steve Burns, and Matt Graf. A 940MHz data rate 8Mb CMOS SRAM. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference, pages 198-199, February 1999.
 
5
 
6
Doug Burger and Todd M. Austin. The simplescalar tool set version 2.0. Technical Report 1342, Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, June 1997.
 
7
Doug Burger, Alain Kfigi, and M.S. Hrishikesh. Memory hierarchy extensions to simplescalar 3.0. Technical Report TR99-25, Department of Computer Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, April 2000.
 
8
Keith Diefendorff. Power4 focuses on memory bandwidth. Microprocessor Report, 13(13), October 1999.
 
9
 
10
 
11
Mark Horowitz, Ron Ho, and Ken Mai. The future of wires. In Seminconductor Research Corporation Workshop on Interconnects for Systems on a Chip, May 1999.
 
12
 
13
14
15
 
16
 
17
S. Naffziger. A subnanosecond 0.5#m 64b adder design. In Digest of Technical Papers, International Solid-State Circuits Conference, pages 362-363, February 1996.
18
 
19
Glenn Reinman and Norm Jouppi. Extensions to cacti, 1999. Unpublished document.
 
20
Scott Rixner, William J. Dally, Brucek Khailany, Peter Mattson, Ujval J. Kapasi, and John D. Owens. Register organization for media processing. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture, January 2000.
 
21
 
22
The national technology roadmap for semiconductors. Semiconductor Industry Association, 1999.
 
23
Hiroshi Shimizu, Kenji Ijitsu, Hideo Akiyoshi, Keizo Aoyama, Hirotaka Takatsuka, Kou Watanabe, Ryota Nanjo, and Yoshihiro Takao. A 1.4ns access 700MHz 288Kb SRAM macro with expandable architecture. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference, pages 190-191,459, February 1999.
 
24
25
 
26
Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. SPEC Newsletter, September 1995.
 
27
 
28
A. J. van Genderen and N. P. van der Meijs. Xspace user's manual. Technical Report ET-CAS 96-02, Delft University of Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering, August 1996.
 
29
 
30
Steven J.E. Wilton and Norman P. Jouppi. An enhanced access and cycle time model for on-chip caches. Technical Report 95/3, Digital Equipment Corporation, Western Research Laboratory, 1995.
 
31
Cangsang Zhao, Uddalak Bhattacharya, Martin Denham, Jim Kolousek, Yi Lu, Yong-Gee Ng, Novat Nintunze, Kamal Sarkez, and Hemmige Varadarajan. An 18Mb, 12.3GB/s cmos pipeline-burst cache SRAM with 1.54Gb/s/pin. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference, pages 200-201,461, February 1999.

CITED BY  126

Collaborative Colleagues:
Vikas Agarwal: colleagues
M. S. Hrishikesh: colleagues
Stephen W. Keckler: colleagues
Doug Burger: colleagues