1 / 25

Lecture 2: Measuring Performance/Cost/Power

Lecture 2: Measuring Performance/Cost/Power. Today’s topics: (Sections 1.6, 1.4, 1.7, 1.8) Quantitative principles of computer design Measuring cost Real industrial examples. Summarizing Performance. Recall discussion on AM versus GM GM: does not require a reference machine, but does

amandahester
Download Presentation

Lecture 2: Measuring Performance/Cost/Power

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Lecture 2: Measuring Performance/Cost/Power • Today’s topics: (Sections 1.6, 1.4, 1.7, 1.8) • Quantitative principles of computer design • Measuring cost • Real industrial examples

  2. Summarizing Performance • Recall discussion on AM versus GM • GM: does not require a reference machine, but does • not predict performance very well • So we multiplied execution times and determined that sys-A is 1.2x faster…but on what workload? • AM: does predict performance for a specific workload, • but that workload was determined by executing • programs on a reference machine • Every year or so, the reference machine will have to be updated

  3. Example • We fixed a reference machine X and ran 4 programs • A, B, C, D on it such that each program ran for 1 second • The exact same workload (the four programs execute • the same number of instructions that they did on • machine X) is run on a new machine Y and the • execution times for each program are 0.8, 1.1, 0.5, 2 • With AM of normalized execution times, we can conclude • that Y is 1.1 times slower than X – perhaps, not for all • workloads, but definitely for one specific workload (where • all programs run on the ref-machine for an equal #cycles) • With GM, you may find inconsistencies

  4. GM Example • Computer-A Computer-B Computer-C • P1 1 sec 10 secs 20 secs • P2 1000 secs 100 secs 20 secs • Conclusion with GMs: (i) A=B • (ii) C is ~1.6 times faster • For (i) to be true, P1 must occur 100 times for every • occurrence of P2 • With the above assumption, (ii) is no longer true • Hence, GM can lead to inconsistencies

  5. CPU Performance Equation • CPU time = clock cycle time x cycles per instruction x • number of instructions • Influencing factors for each: • clock cycle time: technology and organization • CPI: organization and instruction set design • instruction count: instruction set design and compiler • CPI (cycles per instruction) or IPC (instructions per cycle) • can not be accurately estimated analytically

  6. Measuring System CPI • Assume that an architectural innovation only affects CPI • For 3 programs, base CPIs: 1.2, 1.8, 2.5 • CPIs for proposed model: 1.4, 1.9, 2.3 • What is the best way to summarize performance with a • single number? AM, HM, or GM of CPIs?

  7. Example • AM of CPI for base case = 1.2 cyc + 1.8 cyc + 2.5 cyc • instr instr instr • 5.5 cycles is execution time if each program ran for • one instruction – therefore, AM of CPI defines a • workload where every program runs for an equal #instrs • HM of CPI = 1 / AM of IPC ; defines a workload where • every program runs for an equal number of cycles • GM of CPI: warm fuzzy number, not necessarily • representing any workload

  8. Amdahl’s Law • Architecture design is very bottleneck-driven – make the • common case fast, do not waste resources on a component • that has little impact on overall performance/power • Amdahl’s Law: performance improvements through an • enhancement is limited by the fraction of time the • enhancement comes into play • Example: a web server spends 40% of time in the CPU • and 60% of time doing I/O – a new processor that is ten • times faster results in a 36% reduction in execution time • (speedup of 1.56) – Amdahl’s Law states that maximum • execution time reduction is 40% (max speedup of 1.66)

  9. Principle of Locality • Most programs are predictable in terms of instructions • executed and data accessed • The 90-10 Rule: a program spends 90% of its execution • time in only 10% of the code • Temporal locality: a program will shortly re-visit X • Spatial locality: a program will shortly visit X+1

  10. Exploit Parallelism • Most operations do not depend on each other – hence, • execute them in parallel • At the circuit level, simultaneously access multiple ways • of a set-associative cache • At the organization level, execute multiple instructions at • the same time • At the system level, execute a different program while one • is waiting on I/O

  11. Factors Determining Cost • Cost: amount spent by manufacturer to produce a finished • good • High volume  faster learning curve, increased • manufacturing efficiency (10% lower cost if volume doubles), • lower R&D cost per produced item • Commodities: identical products sold by many vendors in • large volumes (keyboards, DRAMs) – low cost because of • high volume and competition among suppliers

  12. Wafers and Dies An entire wafer is produced and chopped into dies that undergo testing and packaging

  13. Integrated Circuit Cost • Cost of an integrated circuit = • (cost of die + cost of packaging and testing) / final test yield • Cost of die = cost of wafer / (dies per wafer x die yield) • Dies/wafer = wafer area / die area - p wafer diam / die diag • Die yield = wafer yield x (1 + (defect rate x die area) / a) -a • Thus, die yield depends on die area and complexity • arising from multiple manufacturing steps (a ~ 4.0)

  14. Integrated Circuit Cost Examples • A 30 cm diameter wafer cost $5-6K in 2001 • Such a wafer yields about 366 good 1 cm2 dies and 1014 • good 0.49 cm2 dies (note the effect of area and yield) • Die sizes: Alpha 21264 1.15 cm2 , Itanium 3.0 cm2 , • embedded processors are between 0.1 – 0.25 cm2

  15. Contribution of IC Costs to Total System Cost

  16. Cost and Price • A $1000 increase in cost may result in a $3000 increase • in price – hence, important to understand the relationship • The relationship is complex – for example, a company may • underprice a product that has heavy competition and • overprice a product that has no competition

  17. Computing Price • Component costs: developing wafers, testing, packaging • Direct costs: 10-30% of component costs: labor, warranty • Gross margin (indirect costs): 10-45% of sum of these • three (average selling price): R&D, marketing, sales, • building rental, profits • Retail mark-up: sum of all the above gives list price • Low-end PCs may have low gross margins – low R&D, • low cost for sales, low profits • R&D costs are only 4-12%

  18. Desktop Prices All systems have similar configurations – price variations due to expandability, expensive disks/memory/processor/OS, commoditization

  19. Desktop Price-Performance (SPEC CPU2k)

  20. Server Prices

  21. Server Performance Using the OLTP benchmark TPC-C

  22. Server Price-Performance

  23. Embedded Prices • Does not include the prices and power of support chips • High variance in functionality, price, performance, power • The IBM and AMD processors are used in network switches • and laptops, the NEC VR 5432 is used in laser printers, the • NEC VR 4122 is used in PDAs

  24. Embedded Price-Performance-Power

  25. Title • Bullet

More Related