Pipeline-Stage-Resolved Timing Characterization of FPGA and ASIC Implementations of a RISC-V Processor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a pipeline-stage-resolved timing characterization of a 32-bit RISC-V processor implemented on a 20 nm FPGA and a 7 nm FinFET ASIC platform. A unified analysis framework is introduced that decomposes timing paths into logic, routing, and clocking components and maps them to well-defined pipeline-stage transitions. This approach enables systematic comparison of timing behavior across heterogeneous implementation technologies at a microarchitectural level. Using static timing analysis and statistical characterization, the study shows that although both implementations exhibit dominant critical paths in the EX→MEM pipeline transition, their underlying timing mechanisms differ fundamentally. FPGA timing is dominated by routing parasitics and placementdependent variability, resulting in wide slack distributions and sensitivity to routing topology. In contrast, ASIC timing is governed primarily by combinational logic depth and predictable parametric variation across process, voltage, and temperature corners, yielding narrow and stable timing distributions. The results provide quantitative insight into the structural origins of timing divergence between programmable and custom fabrics and demonstrate the effectiveness of pipeline-stageresolved analysis for identifying platform-specific bottlenecks. Based on these findings, the paper derives design implications for achieving predictable timing closure in processor architectures targeting both FPGA and ASIC implementations.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".