How useful are non-blocking loads, stream buffers and speculative execution in multiple issue processors?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the relative performance impact of non-blocking loads, stream buffers, and speculative execution both used individually and in conjunction with each other. We have simulated the SPEC92 benchmarks on a statically scheduled quad-issue processor model, running code from the Multiflow compiler. Non-blocking loads and stream buffers both provide a significant performance advantage, and their combination performs significantly better than either alone. For example, with a 64-byte, 2-way set associative cache with 32 cycle fetch latency, non-blocking loads reduce the run-time by 21% while stream-buffers reduce it by 26%, and the combined use of the two yields a 47% reduction. The addition of speculative execution further improves the performance of the systems that we have simulated, with or without non-blocking loads and stream buffers, by an additional 20% to 4O%. We expect that the use of all three of these techniques will be important in future generations of microprocessors.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it