Ignore:
Timestamp:
Mar 25, 2011, 7:44:17 PM (8 years ago)
Author:
lindanl
Message:

section 6

File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • docs/PACT2011/06-scalability.tex

    r1021 r1033  
    11\section{Scalability}
    22\subsection{Performance}
    3 Figure \ref{Scalability} (a) shows the performance of Parabix2 on three different cores: core2, corei3 and sandybridge.
     3Figure \ref{Scalability} (a) shows the performance of Parabix2 on three different cores: Core2, Core i3 and Sandybridge.
    44The average processing time of the five workloads, which is evaluated as CPU cycles per thousand bytes,
    55is divided up by bitstream parsing and byte space postprocessing.
    66Bitstream parsing, mainly consists of SIMD instructions,
    7 is able to achieve 17\% performance improvement moving from core2 to corei3;
    8 22\% performance improvement moving from corei3 to sandybridge,
     7is able to achieve 17\% performance improvement moving from Core2 to Core i3;
     822\% performance improvement moving from Core i3 to Sandybridge,
    99which is relatively stable compared to postprocessing,
    10 which gains 18\% to 31\% performance moving from core2 to corei3;
    11 0 to 17\% performance improvement moving from corei3 to sandybridge.
     10which gains 18\% to 31\% performance moving from Core2 to Core i3;
     110 to 17\% performance improvement moving from Core i3 to Sandybridge.
    1212
    1313As comparison, we also measured the performance of Expat on all the three cores, which is shown is Figure \ref{Scalability} (b).
    14 The performance improvement is less than 5\% by running Expat on corei3 instead of core2
    15 and it is less than 10\% by running on sandybridge instead of corei3.
     14The performance improvement is less than 5\% by running Expat on Core i3 instead of Core2
     15and it is less than 10\% by running on Sandybridge instead of Core i3.
    1616
    1717Parabix2 scales much better than Expat and is able to achieve an overall performance improvement
    1818up to 26\% simply by running the same code on a newer core.
    19 Further improvement on sandybridge with AVX will be discussed in the next section.
     19Further improvement on Sandybridge with AVX will be discussed in the next section.
    2020
    2121\begin{figure}
     
    3535
    3636The newer processors are not only designed to have better performance but also more energy-efficient.
    37 Figure \ref{power_Parabix2} shows the average power when running Parabix2 on core2, corei3 and sandybridge with different input files.
    38 On core2, the average power is about 32 watts. Corei3 saves 30\% of the power compared with core2.
    39 Sandybridge saves 25\% of the power compared with corei3 and consumes only 15 watts.
     37Figure \ref{power_Parabix2} shows the average power when running Parabix2 on Core2, Core i3 and Sandybridge with different input files.
     38On Core2, the average power is about 32 watts. Core i3 saves 30\% of the power compared with Core2.
     39Sandybridge saves 25\% of the power compared with Core i3 and consumes only 15 watts.
    4040
    4141The energy consumption is further improved by better performance, which means a shorter processing time, as we moved to the newer cores.
    42 As a result, Parabix2 on sandybridge cost 72\% to 75\% less energy than Parabix2 on core2.
     42As a result, Parabix2 on Sandybridge cost 72\% to 75\% less energy than Parabix2 on Core2.
    4343
    4444\begin{figure}
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.