MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986491730 · doi:10.1145/1534909.1534910

A mechanistic performance model for superscalar out-of-order processors

2009· article· en· W1986491730 on OpenAlexaff
Stijn Eyerman, Lieven Eeckhout, Tejas S. Karkhanis, James E. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Computer Systems · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
FundersVlaamse regeringUniversiteit GentFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekIntel Corporation
KeywordsComputer sciencePipeline (software)MicroarchitectureParallel computingCacheInterval (graph theory)ScalingSuperscalarBranch predictorPipeline burst cacheOut-of-order executionInstructions per cycleSpeculative executionCPU cacheCache algorithmsOperating systemCentral processing unit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A mechanistic model for out-of-order superscalar processors is developed and then applied to the study of microarchitecture resource scaling. The model divides execution time into intervals separated by disruptive miss events such as branch mispredictions and cache misses. Each type of miss event results in characterizable performance behavior for the execution time interval. By considering an interval's type and length (measured in instructions), execution time can be predicted for the interval. Overall execution time is then determined by aggregating the execution time over all intervals. The mechanistic model provides several advantages over prior modeling approaches, and, when estimating performance, it differs from detailed simulation of a 4-wide out-of-order processor by an average of 7%. The mechanistic model is applied to the general problem of resource scaling in out-of-order superscalar processors. First, we use the model to determine size relationships among microarchitecture structures in a balanced processor design. Second, we use the mechanistic model to study scaling of both pipeline depth and width in balanced processor designs. We corroborate previous results in this area and provide new results. For example, we show that at optimal design points, the pipeline depth times the square root of the processor width is nearly constant. Finally, we consider the behavior of unbalanced, overprovisioned processor designs based on insight gained from the mechanistic model. We show that in certain situations an overprovisioned processor may lead to improved overall performance. Designs where a processor's dispatch width is wider than its issue width are of particular interest.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations182
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Computer SystemsSame topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207