CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture Benchmarking Some material adapted from Mohamed Younis, UMBC CMSC 611 Spr 2003 course slides Some material adapted.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture Performance Some material adapted from Mohamed Younis, UMBC CMSC 611 Spr 2003 course slides Some material adapted.
Advertisements

CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture Cache Some material adapted from Mohamed Younis, UMBC CMSC 611 Spr 2003 course slides Some material adapted from.
Power calculation for transistor operation What will cause power consumption to increase? CS2710 Computer Organization1.
TU/e Processor Design 5Z032 1 Processor Design 5Z032 The role of Performance Henk Corporaal Eindhoven University of Technology 2009.
Computer Performance CS350 Term Project-Spring 2001 Elizabeth Cramer Bryan Driskell Yassaman Shayesteh.
Lecture 7: 9/17/2002CS170 Fall CS170 Computer Organization and Architecture I Ayman Abdel-Hamid Department of Computer Science Old Dominion University.
CSCE 212 Chapter 4: Assessing and Understanding Performance Instructor: Jason D. Bakos.
Chapter 4 Assessing and Understanding Performance Bo Cheng.
CIS629 Fall Lecture Performance Overview Execution time is the best measure of performance: simple, intuitive, straightforward. Two important.
Copyright © 1998 Wanda Kunkle Computer Organization 1 Chapter 2.5 Comparing and Summarizing Performance.
Computer Performance Evaluation: Cycles Per Instruction (CPI)
Computer ArchitectureFall 2007 © September 17, 2007 Karem Sakallah CS-447– Computer Architecture.
Chapter 4 Assessing and Understanding Performance
CIS429/529 Winter 07 - Performance - 1 Performance Overview Execution time is the best measure of performance: simple, intuitive, straightforward. Two.
1 Chapter 4. 2 Measure, Report, and Summarize Make intelligent choices See through the marketing hype Key to understanding underlying organizational motivation.
CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture Performance Some material adapted from Mohamed Younis, UMBC CMSC 611 Spr 2003 course slides Some material adapted.
CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture Benchmarking Some material adapted from Mohamed Younis, UMBC CMSC 611 Spr 2003 course slides Some material adapted.
1 Computer Performance: Metrics, Measurement, & Evaluation.
Lecture 2: Computer Performance
Ch4b- 2 EE/CS/CPE Computer Organization  Seattle Pacific University Performance metrics I’m concerned with how long it takes to run my program.
Computer Performance Computer Engineering Department.
Lecture 2b: Performance Metrics. Performance Metrics Measurable characteristics of a computer system: Count of an event Duration of a time interval Size.
Copyright 1995 by Coherence LTD., all rights reserved (Revised: Oct 97 by Rafi Lohev, Oct 99 by Yair Wiseman, Sep 04 Oren Kapah) IBM י ב מ 7-1 Measuring.
Memory/Storage Architecture Lab Computer Architecture Performance.
CWRU EECS 3221 Benchmarks EECS 322 Computer Architecture Instructor: Francis G. Wolff Case Western Reserve University This presentation.
1 CHAPTER 2 THE ROLE OF PERFORMANCE. 2 Performance Measure, Report, and Summarize Make intelligent choices Why is some hardware better than others for.
CDA 3101 Fall 2013 Introduction to Computer Organization Computer Performance 28 August 2013.
1 CS/EE 362 Hardware Fundamentals Lecture 9 (Chapter 2: Hennessy and Patterson) Winter Quarter 1998 Chris Myers.
Advanced Computer Architecture Fundamental of Computer Design Instruction Set Principles and Examples Pipelining:Basic and Intermediate Concepts Memory.
Computer Organization and Architecture Tutorial 1 Kenneth Lee.
Lecture 9: 9/24/2002CS170 Fall CS170 Computer Organization and Architecture I Ayman Abdel-Hamid Department of Computer Science Old Dominion University.
1 CS/COE0447 Computer Organization & Assembly Language CHAPTER 4 Assessing and Understanding Performance.
Computer Architecture
Lecture 8: 9/19/2002CS170 Fall CS170 Computer Organization and Architecture I Ayman Abdel-Hamid Department of Computer Science Old Dominion University.
1 Seoul National University Performance. 2 Performance Example Seoul National University Sonata Boeing 727 Speed 100 km/h 1000km/h Seoul to Pusan 10 hours.
Performance – Last Lecture Bottom line performance measure is time Performance A = 1/Execution Time A Comparing Performance N = Performance A / Performance.
Performance Lecture notes from MKP, H. H. Lee and S. Yalamanchili.
CEN 316 Computer Organization and Design Assessing and Understanding Performance Mansour AL Zuair.
1  1998 Morgan Kaufmann Publishers How to measure, report, and summarize performance (suorituskyky, tehokkuus)? What factors determine the performance.
Performance Performance
TEST 1 – Tuesday March 3 Lectures 1 - 8, Ch 1,2 HW Due Feb 24 –1.4.1 p.60 –1.4.4 p.60 –1.4.6 p.60 –1.5.2 p –1.5.4 p.61 –1.5.5 p.61.
September 10 Performance Read 3.1 through 3.4 for Wednesday Only 3 classes before 1 st Exam!
Performance – Last Lecture Bottom line performance measure is time Performance A = 1/Execution Time A Comparing Performance N = Performance A / Performance.
4. Performance 4.1 Introduction 4.2 CPU Performance and Its Factors
EGRE 426 Computer Organization and Design Chapter 4.
Performance 9 ways to fool the public Old Chapter 4 New Chapter 1.4.
CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture Performance & Benchmarks Some material adapted from Mohamed Younis, UMBC CMSC 611 Spr 2003 course slides Some.
Performance Computer Organization II 1 Computer Science Dept Va Tech January 2009 © McQuain & Ribbens Defining Performance Which airplane has.
Jan. 5, 2000Systems Architecture II1 Machine Organization (CS 570) Lecture 2: Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking * Jeremy R. Johnson Wed. Oct. 4,
Computer Architecture CSE 3322 Web Site crystal.uta.edu/~jpatters/cse3322 Send to Pramod Kumar, with the names and s.
CS203 – Advanced Computer Architecture Performance Evaluation.
CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture Performance Some material adapted from Mohamed Younis, UMBC CMSC 611 Spr 2003 course slides Some material adapted.
CSE 340 Computer Architecture Summer 2016 Understanding Performance.
Performance 9 ways to fool the public #1 – Reporting Results.
June 20, 2001Systems Architecture II1 Systems Architecture II (CS ) Lecture 1: Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking * Jeremy R. Johnson Wed.
Measuring Performance II and Logic Design
CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture
CS203 – Advanced Computer Architecture
Lecture 2: Performance Today’s topics:
Lecture 2: Performance Evaluation
September 2 Performance Read 3.1 through 3.4 for Tuesday
Execution time Execution Time (processor-related) = IC x CPI x T
CSCE 212 Chapter 4: Assessing and Understanding Performance
CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture
CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture
Performance of computer systems
CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture
CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture
January 25 Did you get mail from Chun-Fa about assignment grades?
Computer Organization and Design Chapter 4
Presentation transcript:

CMSC 611: Advanced Computer Architecture Benchmarking Some material adapted from Mohamed Younis, UMBC CMSC 611 Spr 2003 course slides Some material adapted from Hennessy & Patterson / © 2003 Elsevier Science

Important Equations (so far) 2

Ahmdal’s Law for Speedup 3

Performance Benchmarks Many widely-used benchmarks are small programs that have significant locality of instruction and data reference Universal benchmarks can be misleading since hardware and compiler vendors do optimize their design for these programs The best types of benchmarks are real applications since they reflect the end-user interest Architectures might perform well for some applications and poorly for others Compilation can boost performance by taking advantage of architecture-specific features Application-specific compiler optimization are becoming more popular 4

Wrong summary can present a confusing picture – A is 10 times faster than B for program 1 – B is 10 times faster than A for program 2 Total execution time is a consistent summary measure Relative execution times for the same workload – Assuming that programs 1 and 2 are executing for the same number of times on computers A and B Execution time is the only valid and unimpeachable measure of performance Comparing & Summarizing Performance 5

The SPEC Benchmarks SPEC stands for System Performance Evaluation Cooperative suite of benchmarks –Created by a set of companies to improve the measurement and reporting of CPU performance SPEC2006 is the latest suite that consists of 12 integer (C or C++) and 17 floating-point (Fortran, C, and C++) programs –Customized SPEC suites assess performance of graphics and transaction systems. Since SPEC requires running applications on real hardware, the memory system has a significant effect on performance 6

App. and arch. specific optimization can dramatically impact performance Effect of Compilation 7

Guiding principle is reproducibility (report environment & experiments setup) Performance Reports 8

The SPEC Benchmarks Bigger numeric values of the SPEC ratio indicate faster machine 1997 “historical” reference machine 9

SPEC95 for Pentium and Pentium Pro The performance measured may be different on other Pentium-based hardware with different memory system and using different compilers –At the same clock rate, the SPECint95 measure shows that Pentium Pro is times faster while the SPECfp95 shows that it is times faster –When the clock rate is increased by a certain factor, the processor performance increases by a lower factor 10

Weighted arithmetic means summarize performance while tracking exec. time Never use AM for normalizing time relative to a reference machine Where:n is the number of programs executed w i is a weighting factor that indicates the frequency of executing program i with and Performance Summary 11

SPECbase CINT2000 SPEC CINT2000 per $1000 in price Different results are obtained for other benchmarks, e.g. SPEC CFP2000 With the exception of the Sunblade price-performance metrics were consistent with performance Prices reflects those of July 2001 Price-Performance Metric 12

Historic Perspective In early computers most instructions of a machine took the same execution time –The measure of performance for old machines was the time required performing an individual operation (e.g. addition) New computers have diverse set of instructions with different execution times –The relative frequency of instructions across many programs was calculated –The average instruction execution time was measured by multiplying the time of each instruction by its frequency The average instruction execution time was a small step to MIPS that grew in popularity 13

The use of MIPS is simple and intuitive, faster machines have bigger MIPS Using MIPS MIPS = Million of Instructions Per Second –one of the simplest metrics –valid only in a limited context There are three problems with MIPS: –MIPS specifies the instruction execution rate but not the capabilities of the instructions –MIPS varies between programs on the same computer –MIPS can vary inversely with performance (see next example) 14