Multicore microprocessors and embedded multicore SOCs have very different needs
By Steve Leibson, Tensilica, Inc.
Jul 18 2007, Embedded.com
The term "multicore" seems to be getting a lot of use these days. For example, there's an industry association dedicated to the idea and the IEEE Computer Society's Computer [1,2] magazine recently devoted two cover stories to the concept. Like the poem about the blind men and the elephant [3], the term appears to mean many different things to different people depending on the context.
When used to describe PC-class microprocessors, the phrase nearly always refers to on-chip arrays of identical, single-ISA (instruction-set architecture) processors that handle processing loads using homogeneous or symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) and shared memory.
For SOC designs, the term may refer to shared-memory SMP architectures but it can also mean heterogeneous (single-ISA or multiple-ISA), single-chip, asymmetric multiprocessing (AMP) designs, with or without shared memory. Therefore, whenever you see a reference to a multicore chip or design, you need to dig deeper to clarify how the term is being used.
SMP and AMP approaches with and without shared memory can be used to solve processing problems that are beyond the capabilities of an individual microprocessor. Multicore PC and server microprocessors based on the x86 architecture started to appear after Intel and AMD hit the clock-rate wall and could no longer increase single-core-processor clock rates the way they did throughout the 1990s.
The maximum clock rates of these processors approached 4 GHz, at the cost of excessive power consumption, heat dissipation, and electromigration-related reliability concerns.
The path to further increases in processor performance through increased clock rates appeared to be blocked. An alternate path involved putting two and then four identical processor cores (and later eight and probably 16 processor cores) on a chip with both cores running at a lower clock rate to reduce power consumption and heat dissipation.
Jul 18 2007, Embedded.com
The term "multicore" seems to be getting a lot of use these days. For example, there's an industry association dedicated to the idea and the IEEE Computer Society's Computer [1,2] magazine recently devoted two cover stories to the concept. Like the poem about the blind men and the elephant [3], the term appears to mean many different things to different people depending on the context.
When used to describe PC-class microprocessors, the phrase nearly always refers to on-chip arrays of identical, single-ISA (instruction-set architecture) processors that handle processing loads using homogeneous or symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) and shared memory.
For SOC designs, the term may refer to shared-memory SMP architectures but it can also mean heterogeneous (single-ISA or multiple-ISA), single-chip, asymmetric multiprocessing (AMP) designs, with or without shared memory. Therefore, whenever you see a reference to a multicore chip or design, you need to dig deeper to clarify how the term is being used.
SMP and AMP approaches with and without shared memory can be used to solve processing problems that are beyond the capabilities of an individual microprocessor. Multicore PC and server microprocessors based on the x86 architecture started to appear after Intel and AMD hit the clock-rate wall and could no longer increase single-core-processor clock rates the way they did throughout the 1990s.
The maximum clock rates of these processors approached 4 GHz, at the cost of excessive power consumption, heat dissipation, and electromigration-related reliability concerns.
The path to further increases in processor performance through increased clock rates appeared to be blocked. An alternate path involved putting two and then four identical processor cores (and later eight and probably 16 processor cores) on a chip with both cores running at a lower clock rate to reduce power consumption and heat dissipation.
To read the full article, click here
Related Semiconductor IP
- TSMC 7nm 0V75 / 0V9 ESD Local Clamp – Low Cap
- TSMC 65nm 3V3 ESD Local Clamp – Rad Hard
- TSMC 5nm 1V8, 1.2V and 0.9V ESD Local Protection – Low Cap
- TSMC 3nm 3V3 ESD Local Clamp
- TSMC 3nm 1V2 ESD Local Clamp – Low Capacitance
Related Articles
- Using softcore-based FPGAs to balance hardware/software needs in a multicore design
- Using dynamic run-time scheduling to improve the price-performance-power efficiency of heterogeneous multicore SoCs
- Embedded multicore needs communications standards
- Multicore SoCs change interconnect requirements
Latest Articles
- LACE: Large Language Model Aided Multi-Agent Framework for Agile RISC-V Instruction Extension
- A Process-Aware Hybrid Si/IGO Monolithic-3D 6T SRAM with BEOL Pass-Gates for the 2nm Node
- Automated Estimation of MBIST Area and Test Time in Heterogeneous Memory IPs via Stacked Ensemble Framework
- VIPER: Architecture-Aware Performance Modeling for Processing-in-Memory Design-Space Exploration
- CTTE: An Open Dual-Protocol RISC-V Trace Encoder for N-Trace and E-Trace