MÔN HỌC: KIẾN TRÚC MÁY TÍNH Họ và tên: Mai Ngọc Duy

MÃ HỌC PHẦN: INT2212 42 Lớp: K66 CACLC2

MSV: 21020512
Bài tập về nhà Tuần 2

***
* * * *

Exercise 2.1:
We use the formula: Execution time = Instruction count × Clock cycles per instruction × Clock cycle
time.
Execution-time1 = (10 × 1 + 3×2 + 4×3 + 3×4) × 1/2GHz = 39 × 1/2GHz = 19.5 ns
Execution-time2 = (20 × 1 + 3×2 + 2×3 + 1×4) × 1/2GHz = 36 × 1/2GHz = 18 ns

Now we calculate the MIPS:

1
MIPS1 = ≈ 51.28 MIPS
19.5 ns
1
MIPS2 = ≈ 55.56 MIPS
18 ns
 The second optimization results in faster program.

Exercise 2.2:
30
Fraction of CPU which gets enhanced = = 0.30
100
50
Fraction of CPU in I/O activity = = 0.50
100
Speed up for enhancement given = 10
Therefore, the overall speed up is = 1 / (0.50 + (0.30/10)) = 1.889.

Exercise 2.3:
a) To combine rates of execution one must use a weighted harmonic mean (WHM).
The WHM is defined as
 1
WHM = n
W
∑ Ri
i=1 i

where Wi and Ri are the weights and rate for program i within the suite respectively.
One must not use an arithmetic mean or a simple harmonic mean, as these do not lead to a
correct computation of the overall execution rate for the collection of programs. Each weight W is
defined as the ratio of the amount of work performed in program i to the total amount of work
performed in the whole suite of programs.
Thus, if program i executes Ni floating-point operations then, assuming m programs in total;
Ni
Wi= m
or,
∑Nj
j=1

N 1+ N 2+ N 3+ …+ N m
WHM = or,
t 1 +t 2+t 3 +…+t m
t 1 r 1 +t 2 r 2 +t 3 r 3 +…+ t m r m
WHM =
t 1+ t 2 +t 3+ …+t m
m
We know that T =∑ t j
j=1

Using the above two equations, we can say that

t1 t t
WHM = r 1+ 2 r 2 +…+ m r m
T T T

b) For this example, WHM = (0.1 × 1000 + 0.55 × 110 + 0.2 × 500 + 0.1 × 200 + 0.05 × 75), which is
284.25 MFLOPS.

c) Consider P2 in isolation. If all other programs run at rate rꝏ then:

R2
lim ( WHM )=
r→∞ W2

Thus the upper bound on the benchmark performance is simply R2/W2. We therefore have 284:25 =
0:55 = 516:82 mflops.

Exercise 2.4:
The overall speed up we can achieve:
Execution time(old ) ( 0.4 ×15 )+(1−0.4)
Overall speed up= = =6.6
Execution time(new) 0.4+(1−0.4)

Exercise 2.5:
a)
- The design constraints are: The constraints are that total system cost must be ≥$50k and ≤$100k, and
total system power consumption must be <50kW.
- The quantity or quantities to maximize is/are: Since the goal of the product is to be a cost-
performance leader, we’d better try to maximize its cost-performance!
- The quantity or quantities to minimize is/are: System cost should be minimized, within the ≥$50k
constraint.

b) (i) the constraints that our design must satisfy:

Constraints on total system cost: Csys = nchipsCX ≥ Csys,minCsys = nchipsCX ≤ Csys,max
Constraints on total system power: Psys = nchipsPX ≤ Psys,max

(ii) the quantity that we should be maximizing in our design (figure of merit),
Maximize system cost-performance: CPsys = Tsys/Csys = TXnchips/CXnchips = TX/CX.

(iii) the quantity that we should be minimizing in our design (figure of demerit)
Minimize system cost (within the minimum cost constraint): Csys = nchipsCX = Csys,min/CX×CX
(This goal is secondary to minimizing the cost per unit of throughput, C X/TX, or maximizing cost-
performance)

c) (i)
CPsys,A =TA/CA = 80 w.u./s/$2.75k = 29.09 w.u./s/$1k
CPsys,B =TB/CB = 50 w.u./s/$1.6k = 31.25 w.u./s/$1k
-> Chip B gives better cost-performance (31¼ work units per second per $1,000 of cost, versus only
29.09 for chip A).
(ii) Since we want to minimize system cost C sys,B = nchipsCB, we must minimize nchips, within the
constraint that nchipsCB ≥ $50k. Thus, the optimal (minimum) value of nchips is given by
nchips,opt = $50k/CB = $50k/$1.6k = 31.25 = 32.
(Since 32×50W = 1.6kW < 50 kW, the power constraint is met.)

(iii) If we had used chip A, then we would have had

nchips,opt = $50k/CA = $50k/$2,750 = 18.18 = 19, and Csys,A = 19×$2,750 = $52,250.
With chip B, we have Csys,B = 32×$1,600 = $51,200.
So chip B also lets us achieve a design with lower total cost that still meets the $50,000 minimum cost
constraint.

Exercise 2.6:

Amdahl’s law is based on a fixed workload, where the problem size is fixed regardless of the machine
size. Gustafson’s law is based on a scaled workload, where the problem size is increased with the
machine size so that the solution time is the same for sequential and parallel executions.

Exercise 2.7:

a) Say Program P1 consists of n x86 instructions, and hence 1.5 × n MIPS instructions. Computer A
operates at 2.5 GHz, i.e. it takes 0.4ns per clock. So the time it takes to execute P1 is 0.4ns/clock × 2
clocks/instructions × 1.5 n instructions = 1.2 n ns. Computer B operates at 3 GHz, i.e. 0.333ns per
clock, so it executes P1 in 0.333 × 3 × n = n ns. So Computer B is 1.2 times faster.

b) Going by similar calculations, A executes P2 in 0.4 × 1 × 1.5 n = 0.6 × n ns while B executes it in

0.333 × 2 × n = 0.666 n ns hence A is 1.11 times faster.

Exercise 2.8:
a) CPI = 0.1 × 50 + 0.9 × 1 = 5.9

b) Time spent just doing divides:

0.1 * 50 × 100 / 5.9 = 84.75%

c) Divide would now take 25 cycles, so

CPI = 0.1 × 25 + 0.9 × 1 = 3.4. Speed up = 5.9/3.4 = 1.735x

d) Divide would now take 10 cycles, so

CPI = 0.1 × 10 + 0.9 × 1 = 1.9. Speed up = 5.9/1.9 = 3.105x

e) Divide would now take 5 cycles, so

CPI = 0.1 × 5 + 0.9 × 1 = 1.4. Speed up = 5.9/1.4 = 4.214x

f) Divide would now take 1 cycle, so

CPI = 0.1 × 1 + 0.9 × 1 = 1. Speed up = 5.9/1 = 5.9x

g) Divide would now take 0 cycles, so

CPI = 0.1 × 0 + 0.9 × 1 = 0.9. Speed up = 5.9/.9 = 6.55x

Exercise 2.9:

Divider execution time = 200 × 60% = 120 (ms)

Others’ execution time = 200 – 120 = 80 (ms)
Total execution time after speed-up = 200 / 2.5 = 80 (ms)
In order to have speed-up of 2.5 on this system, the divider execution time should be Zero, which
means the divider speed-up should be infinity, which is not possible.
Exercise 2.10:

Original Approach 1 Approach 2

Swap 2x FP 4x
Add 10% 1 1 1
Subtract 10% 1 1 1
Integer Multiply 7.5% 3 3 3
Swap 20% 2 1 2
Floating point 2.25% 10 10 2.5
Operation
Others 50.25% 1.5 1.5 1.5

Average CPI (Original) = 10%×1 + 10%×1+ 7.5%×3 + 20%×2 + 2.25%×10 + 50.25% × 1.5 =
180.375%
Average CPI (Approach1) = 10%×1 + 10%×1+ 7.5%×3 + 20%×1 + 2.25%×10 + 50.25% × 1.5 =
160.375%
Average CPI (Approach2) = 10%×1 + 10%×1+ 7.5%×3 + 20%×2 + 2.25%×2.5 + 50.25% × 1.5 =
163.5%
It is clear that Approach 1 with swapping twice as fast is a better choice.