GPUWattch
Bibliographic record
Abstract
General-purpose GPUs (GPGPUs) are becoming prevalent in mainstream computing, and performance per watt has emerged as a more crucial evaluation metric than peak performance. As such, GPU architects require robust tools that will enable them to quickly explore new ways to optimize GPGPUs for energy efficiency. We propose a new GPGPU power model that is configurable, capable of cycle-level calculations, and carefully validated against real hardware measurements. To achieve configurability, we use a bottom-up methodology and abstract parameters from the microarchitectural components as the model's inputs. We developed a rigorous suite of 80 microbenchmarks that we use to bound any modeling uncertainties and inaccuracies. The power model is comprehensively validated against measurements of two commercially available GPUs, and the measured error is within 9.9% and 13.4% for the two target GPUs (GTX 480 and Quadro FX5600). The model also accurately tracks the power consumption trend over time. We integrated the power model with the cycle-level simulator GPGPU-Sim and demonstrate the energy savings by utilizing dynamic voltage and frequency scaling (DVFS) and clock gating. Traditional DVFS reduces GPU energy consumption by 14.4% by leveraging within-kernel runtime variations. More finer-grained SM cluster-level DVFS improves the energy savings from 6.6% to 13.6% for those benchmarks that show clustered execution behavior. We also show that clock gating inactive lanes during divergence reduces dynamic power by 11.2%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.068 | 0.025 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".