2013 IEEE 19th International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA) 2013
DOI: 10.1109/hpca.2013.6522302
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Power struggles: Revisiting the RISC vs. CISC debate on contemporary ARM and x86 architectures

Abstract: RISC vs. CISC wars raged in the 1980s when chip area and processor design complexity were the primary constraints and desktops and servers exclusively dominated the computing landscape. Today, energy and power are the primary design constraints and the computing landscape is significantly different: growth in tablets and smartphones running ARM (a RISC ISA) is surpassing that of desktops and laptops running x86 (a CISC ISA). Further, the traditionally low-power ARM ISA is entering the high-performance server m… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
47
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 142 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
2
47
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Such an endeavour is not trivial, since it would require the use of additional hardware for measuring these metrics. Additionally, a methodology similar to the one used in [6] would be required for isolating the processor power from the power consumed by the remaining parts of the board (e.g., memory). (a) x, y are 1 × n. LGen -Full…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such an endeavour is not trivial, since it would require the use of additional hardware for measuring these metrics. Additionally, a methodology similar to the one used in [6] would be required for isolating the processor power from the power consumed by the remaining parts of the board (e.g., memory). (a) x, y are 1 × n. LGen -Full…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Relevance of ISA and implementation features: As suggested by [1,2], observed differences in performance and energy efficiency are primarily due to implementation characteristics of floating point subsystems, memory hierarchies, clock frequencies, and pipeline depth rather than ISA. In the case of CoMD, differences in performance appear to be substantially attributable to differences in floating point throughput.…”
Section: Figure 8 Comd Energy Delay Productmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Jarus et al [18] compare the power and energy efficiency of Cortex-A8 systems with x86 systems. Blem et al [19] compare Pandaboard, Beagleboard and x86. Stanley-Marbell and Cabezas [20] compare Beagleboard, PowerPC and x86 low-power systems for thermal and power.…”
Section: Arm Hpc Performance Comparisonsmentioning
confidence: 99%