2014 IX Southern Conference on Programmable Logic (SPL) 2014
DOI: 10.1109/spl.2014.7002214
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Power estimations vs. power measurements in Spartan-6 devices

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While deriving the DPCEM, DPC values of the FPGA for all the design variants are required in order to gather the initial data for model derivation. Software prediction tools like Xilinx Power Analyzer can be used for this purpose if accurate switching activity factors are available [64][65][66]. We have used the method of actual DPC measurement to maximize the accuracy of the model derivation process.…”
Section: Power Consumption Measurement Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While deriving the DPCEM, DPC values of the FPGA for all the design variants are required in order to gather the initial data for model derivation. Software prediction tools like Xilinx Power Analyzer can be used for this purpose if accurate switching activity factors are available [64][65][66]. We have used the method of actual DPC measurement to maximize the accuracy of the model derivation process.…”
Section: Power Consumption Measurement Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The work presented in Landsiedel et al 14 predicts the energy consumption of a whole sensor network based on the electric current measurement of a single sensor node. The authors in earlier works 9,8,15,16 measured current using a multimeter to find the consumed power of a CPU. In Kulkarni and Udupi, 17 a method for energy estimation at the instruction level for ARM Cortex M4 processor was presented.…”
Section: Measurement-based Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several research papers have reported the direct on-board power measurements and compared them to estimates through power estimation tools. For example, [25] and [26] reported experimental measurements of power consumption for a core logic of 45-nm Spartan 6 field programmable gate array (FPGA) and core logic of a 65-nm Cyclone III FPGA, respectively, and compared them to values predicted by a power estimation tool. In [25], different types of 32 × 32 bit multipliers were implemented using both look-up tables (LUTs) and embedded units, as case studies.…”
Section: B Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, [25] and [26] reported experimental measurements of power consumption for a core logic of 45-nm Spartan 6 field programmable gate array (FPGA) and core logic of a 65-nm Cyclone III FPGA, respectively, and compared them to values predicted by a power estimation tool. In [25], different types of 32 × 32 bit multipliers were implemented using both look-up tables (LUTs) and embedded units, as case studies. Their findings show a high difference between the measured and estimated power values, especially in circuits with longer combinatorial paths, where the tools tend to over estimate the number of produced glitches.…”
Section: B Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%