| Author |
Message |
Austin Lesea
Guest
|
 Posted:
Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:15 am Post subject:
Power Optimization: can the routing and placement really sav |
|
|
Recently posted on our website:
http://www.xilinx.com/products/silicon_solutions/fpgas/virtex/virtex4/resources/Virtex-4_Power_Case_Study.pdf
Is a case study in which the latest claims of power savings by the
competitor's software are debunked.
I had intended to post this as part of the earlier thread, but I
couldn't find the link to the above white paper.
If you ignore the superiority of Virtex 4, and just concentrate on the
improvement in power from the tool, going from ~ 2.8 watts to ~ 2.6
watts, or an improvement of 200 mW, is roughly an improvement of 7% less
power.
So, routing and placement can really save some power. Or perhaps, one
should say poor routing and poor placement can increase power?
Or should one say that Virtex 4 uses so much less power, that talking
about how much is 'saved' by the software tool is just a distraction to
fool the unwary?
Austin |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Austin Lesea
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:15 am Post subject:
Re: Power Optimization: can the routing and placement really |
|
|
Another excellent reason why the lowest power device is preferable.
Austin
soar2morrow@yahoo.com wrote:
| Quote: | Energy consumption is rapidly eclipsing original product acquisition
cost when doing a total life-time cost analysis. For each Watt the IC
consumes, an additional 2-3 Watts are consumed in power conditioning,
conversion and cooling.
Tom Seim
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:15 am Post subject:
Re: Power Optimization: can the routing and placement really |
|
|
Energy consumption is rapidly eclipsing original product acquisition
cost when doing a total life-time cost analysis. For each Watt the IC
consumes, an additional 2-3 Watts are consumed in power conditioning,
conversion and cooling.
Tom Seim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PeteS
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:15 am Post subject:
Re: Power Optimization: can the routing and placement really |
|
|
Austin Lesea wrote:
| Quote: | Recently posted on our website:
http://www.xilinx.com/products/silicon_solutions/fpgas/virtex/virtex4/resources/Virtex-4_Power_Case_Study.pdf
Is a case study in which the latest claims of power savings by the
competitor's software are debunked.
I had intended to post this as part of the earlier thread, but I
couldn't find the link to the above white paper.
If you ignore the superiority of Virtex 4, and just concentrate on the
improvement in power from the tool, going from ~ 2.8 watts to ~ 2.6
watts, or an improvement of 200 mW, is roughly an improvement of 7% less
power.
So, routing and placement can really save some power. Or perhaps, one
should say poor routing and poor placement can increase power?
Or should one say that Virtex 4 uses so much less power, that talking
about how much is 'saved' by the software tool is just a distraction to
fool the unwary?
Austin
|
It has long been known that appropriate placement and routing at the
physical layer can save power (not by a huge amount, but certainly of
the order of 5% or so depending on the circumstances). I've done a lot
of high speed design work, and minimising power is always an issue.
To find it can be done internally with the place and route tool is not
particularly surprising - indeed it is to be expected. I wonder when
the optimisation goal will be expanded to include 'power' (instead of
just speed and space).
Cheers
PeteS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Schoeberl
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:15 pm Post subject:
Re: Power Optimization: can the routing and placement really |
|
|
Why are the power values measured at 25C and than scaled, in a way
that is not given in the paper, to 85C. Either provide the values
at 25C for reference or measure at 85C.
Another point: measurements are nice, but what about the worst case
values?
Martin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Symon
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:15 pm Post subject:
Re: Power Optimization: can the routing and placement really |
|
|
"Martin Schoeberl" <mschoebe@mail.tuwien.ac.at> wrote in message
news:43b3ef46$0$11094$3b214f66@tunews.univie.ac.at...
| Quote: | Why are the power values measured at 25C and than scaled, in a way
that is not given in the paper, to 85C.
Martin, |
You did read this? "We collected power data at 25°C junction temperature
from idle (0 MHz) up to 200 MHz, in 50Mhz steps. We then scaled the results
to 85°C using static power data previously taken on Virtex-4 and Stratix II
devices over temperature (see Xilinx White Paper WP223 for further
information). Note that previous testing has shown that dynamic power does
not vary significantly with temperature for either family of devices. "
Cheers, Syms. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Schoeberl
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:15 pm Post subject:
Re: Power Optimization: can the routing and placement really |
|
|
| Quote: | Why are the power values measured at 25C and than scaled, in a way
that is not given in the paper, to 85C.
Martin,
You did read this? "We collected power data at 25°C junction temperature from idle (0 MHz) up to 200 MHz, in 50Mhz steps. We then
scaled the results to 85°C using static power data previously taken on Virtex-4 and Stratix II devices over temperature (see
Xilinx White Paper WP223 for further information). Note that previous testing has shown that dynamic power does not vary
significantly with temperature for either family of devices. "
Cheers, Syms.
I did read this and that is exactly the point I want to criticize. |
I don't like measuring an aspect at one temperature point, not
showing the results, but scaling it 'in some way' to a different
temerature point for the final graph.
However, it's not so important - just a little bit of marketing
stuff ;-)
Martin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Alfke
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:14 am Post subject:
Re: Power Optimization: can the routing and placement really |
|
|
Martin Schoeberl wrote:
| Quote: | However, it's not so important - just a little bit of marketing
stuff ;-)
|
No, Martin, it is not Marketing, it is Science.
Dynamic power and static power (leakage) have different temperature
dependencies:
Dynamic power is independent of temperature (since the frequency and
the capacitance do not change), while leakage current is very
temperature dependent.
The two can be added linearily.
Therefore it is not necessary to measure dynamic power at temperature.
And let this quibbling not obfuscate the basic fact:
Xilinx power consumption is much lower than Altera's.
We have to mention this because Altera makes so much noise about their
(non-existent) power superiority. Their claims are just Marketing BS...
Peter Alfke, Xilinx Applications |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Schoeberl
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 30, 2005 1:15 am Post subject:
Re: Power Optimization: can the routing and placement really |
|
|
| Quote: | Martin Schoeberl wrote:
However, it's not so important - just a little bit of marketing
stuff ;-)
No, Martin, it is not Marketing, it is Science.
|
Let's say inbetween. The description of the method in
the Xilinx paper is not self contained. And the initial
criticism still holds: Where are the numbers at 25C?
About scientific relevant measurements: How many different
FPGAs (from different production runs) have been measured
for this paper?
| Quote: | Dynamic power and static power (leakage) have different temperature
dependencies:
Dynamic power is independent of temperature (since the frequency and
the capacitance do not change), while leakage current is very
temperature dependent.
The two can be added linearily.
Therefore it is not necessary to measure dynamic power at temperature.
|
Ok, thanks for the clarification. But in this paper the
overall power was measured at 25C and the static power was
added from some other source for the 85C figure.
| Quote: |
And let this quibbling not obfuscate the basic fact:
Xilinx power consumption is much lower than Altera's.
|
Didn't want to say that this is not correct, just a few
thoughts about methods in the Xilinx paper.
Martin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Alfke
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 30, 2005 1:15 am Post subject:
Re: Power Optimization: can the routing and placement really |
|
|
Martin Schoeberl wrote:
| Quote: | Ok, thanks for the clarification. But in this paper the
overall power was measured at 25C and the static power was
added from some other source for the 85C figure.
Martin, I find it hard to be patient with you. |
If dynamic power is constant with temperature,
and static power increases monotonically with temperature,
and total power is always the linear sum of static and dynamic power,
then I can scientifically state that
Total Power @85 = static power @85 + dynamic power @25 degrees.
And that is not Marketing. (Which we all agree is almost a dirty word
in our circles).
Happy New Year !
Peter Alfke, Xilinx Applications |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in