首页> 外文会议>2011 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design >Myth busters: Microprocessor clocking is from Mars, ASICs clocking is from Venus
【24h】

Myth busters: Microprocessor clocking is from Mars, ASICs clocking is from Venus

机译:神话破灭:微处理器时钟来自火星,ASIC时钟来自金星

获取原文

摘要

This paper compares and contrasts two common clock distribution styles: clock grids, the preferred microprocessor distribution style, and clock trees, the preferred ASICs distribution style. After a high level description of the routing methodologies for clock grids and clock trees, a case study is presented to compare the performance and cost trade-off of grids and trees. Our results show that clock grids consume more power and wiring resources but only to achieve aggressive clock targets. In this example a clock tree style uses 28% less wiring than a full clock grid style but suffers 12 ps more skew. However, compared to a sparse grid style, a clock tree solution uses only 4% less wiring and suffers 9.6 ps higher skew. The key message is that the cost in extra wiring and power consumption across different clock distribution styles is mainly driven by performance targets as opposed to being fundamentally dictated by the grid vs. tree decision.
机译:本文比较并对比了两种常见的时钟分配方式:时钟网格(首选的微处理器分配方式)和时钟树(首选的ASICs分配方式)。在对时钟网格和时钟树的路由方法进行了高级描述之后,提出了一个案例研究,以比较网格和树的性能和成本权衡。我们的结果表明,时钟网格会消耗更多的功率和布线资源,但仅能达到积极的时钟目标。在此示例中,时钟树样式的布线量比完整时钟网格样式的布线少28%,但时滞增加了12 ps。但是,与稀疏的网格样式相比,时钟树解决方案仅使用少4%的布线,并且偏斜率高9.6 ps。关键信息是,跨不同时钟分配方式的额外布线和功耗的成本主要由性能目标驱动,而不是由网格与树决策从根本上决定。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号