Uncovering Real GPU NoC Characteristics: Implications on Interconnect Architecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A critical component of high-throughput processors such as GPUs is the network-on-chip (NoC) that interconnects the large number of cores and the memory partitions together. In this work, we provide a detailed analysis, in terms of latency and bandwidth, of real GPU NoC across several generations of modern NVIDIA GPUs. Our analysis identifies how non-uniform latency exists between the cores and the memory partitions based on their physical location in the GPU. The non-uniformity can result in up to approximately 70 % difference in on-chip latency. In comparison, the bandwidth provided from the cores to the memory partitions is approximately uniform. However, recent GPUs that consist of multiple GPU “partitions” present different on-chip latency and bandwidth characteristics when communicating between the partitions. Based on our analysis of real GPU interconnect, we discuss potential implications including its impact on timing used in side-channel attacks as well as NoC microarchitectures. We show how the non-uniform latency can be exploited in a timing side-channel attack within a GPU as the core location impacts performance (or timing). In addition, proper understanding (and proper assumptions) of GPU NoC is critical to ensure a network that does not bottleneck the overall system performance.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".