Wait of a Decade: Did SPEC CPU 2017 Broaden the Performance Horizon?

Reena Panda, Shuang Song, Joseph Dean, L. John
{"title":"Wait of a Decade: Did SPEC CPU 2017 Broaden the Performance Horizon?","authors":"Reena Panda, Shuang Song, Joseph Dean, L. John","doi":"10.1109/HPCA.2018.00032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The recently released SPEC CPU2017 benchmark suite has already started receiving a lot of attention from both industry and academic communities. However, due to the significantly high size and complexity of the benchmarks, simulating all the CPU2017 benchmarks for design trade-off evaluation is likely to become extremely difficult. Simulating a randomly selected subset, or a random input set, may result in misleading conclusions. This paper analyzes the SPEC CPU2017 benchmarks using performance counter based experimentation from seven commercial systems, and uses statistical techniques such as principal component analysis and clustering to identify similarities among benchmarks. Such analysis can reveal benchmark redundancies and identify subsets for researchers who cannot use all benchmarks in pre-silicon design trade-off evaluations. Many of the SPEC CPU2006 benchmarks have been replaced with larger and complex workloads in the SPEC CPU2017 suite. However, compared to CPU2006, it is unknown whether SPEC CPU2017 benchmarks have different performance demands or whether they stress machines differently. Additionally, to evaluate the balance of CPU2017 benchmarks, we analyze the performance characteristics of CPU2017 workloads and compare them with emerging database, graph analytics and electronic design automation (EDA) workloads. This paper provides the first detailed analysis of SPEC CPU2017 benchmark suite for the architecture community.","PeriodicalId":154694,"journal":{"name":"2018 IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA)","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"75","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2018 IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/HPCA.2018.00032","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 75

Abstract

The recently released SPEC CPU2017 benchmark suite has already started receiving a lot of attention from both industry and academic communities. However, due to the significantly high size and complexity of the benchmarks, simulating all the CPU2017 benchmarks for design trade-off evaluation is likely to become extremely difficult. Simulating a randomly selected subset, or a random input set, may result in misleading conclusions. This paper analyzes the SPEC CPU2017 benchmarks using performance counter based experimentation from seven commercial systems, and uses statistical techniques such as principal component analysis and clustering to identify similarities among benchmarks. Such analysis can reveal benchmark redundancies and identify subsets for researchers who cannot use all benchmarks in pre-silicon design trade-off evaluations. Many of the SPEC CPU2006 benchmarks have been replaced with larger and complex workloads in the SPEC CPU2017 suite. However, compared to CPU2006, it is unknown whether SPEC CPU2017 benchmarks have different performance demands or whether they stress machines differently. Additionally, to evaluate the balance of CPU2017 benchmarks, we analyze the performance characteristics of CPU2017 workloads and compare them with emerging database, graph analytics and electronic design automation (EDA) workloads. This paper provides the first detailed analysis of SPEC CPU2017 benchmark suite for the architecture community.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
等待十年:SPEC CPU 2017是否拓宽了性能视野?
最近发布的SPEC CPU2017基准测试套件已经开始受到工业界和学术界的广泛关注。然而,由于基准测试的尺寸和复杂性非常高,模拟所有的CPU2017基准测试进行设计权衡评估可能会变得非常困难。模拟随机选择的子集或随机输入集可能会导致误导性的结论。本文使用基于性能计数器的实验分析了七个商业系统的SPEC CPU2017基准测试,并使用主成分分析和聚类等统计技术来识别基准测试之间的相似性。这样的分析可以揭示基准冗余和识别子集的研究人员谁不能使用所有的基准在前硅设计权衡评估。在SPEC CPU2017套件中,许多SPEC CPU2006基准测试已经被更大、更复杂的工作负载所取代。然而,与CPU2006相比,SPEC CPU2017基准测试是否有不同的性能需求,或者它们对机器的压力是否不同,目前尚不清楚。此外,为了评估CPU2017基准测试的平衡性,我们分析了CPU2017工作负载的性能特征,并将其与新兴的数据库、图形分析和电子设计自动化(EDA)工作负载进行了比较。本文首次为架构社区提供了SPEC CPU2017基准测试套件的详细分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Record-Replay Architecture as a General Security Framework LATTE-CC: Latency Tolerance Aware Adaptive Cache Compression Management for Energy Efficient GPUs Secure DIMM: Moving ORAM Primitives Closer to Memory OuterSPACE: An Outer Product Based Sparse Matrix Multiplication Accelerator WIR: Warp Instruction Reuse to Minimize Repeated Computations in GPUs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1