Workload-Aware Power Gating Design and Run-Time Management for Massively Parallel GPGPUs
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
Power gating (PG) is an effective power efficiency improvement technique. Future general-purpose graphics processing units (GPGPUs) will likely feature hundreds of compute units (CUs) and be power constrained, which leads to serious challenges to existing PG methodologies. In this paper, we propose novel design-time and run-time techniques to effectively implement power gating in future GPGPUs. Based on industrial models/measurement facilities, we show that designers must consider run-time parallelism within potential applications while implementing power gating designs to avoid incurring unnecessary design overheads. By scaling measurements from a real 28nm GPGPU to a hypothetical future 10nm node, we show that a PG granularity of 16 CU/cluster achieves 99% peak run-time performance without the excessive 53% design-time area overhead of per-CU PG. We also demonstrate that a run-time power management algorithm that is aware of the PG granularity leads to up to 18% additional performance through frequency-boosting under thermal-design power (TDP) constraints.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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