FPGA Floating Point Performance

By Dave Strenski

January 12, 2007

HPC programmers are evaluating alternative accelerators to boost the performance of their applications. When looking at FPGAs, they are confronted with an array of new terminologies and concepts that can be difficult to understand at first. This article will walk the HPC programmer through understanding double precision (64-bit) floating-point performance of Xilinx Virtex-4 LX200 and Virtex-5 LX330 FPGAs and compares them to the performance of a 2.5 GHz, dual-core Opteron processor.

The FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) can be thought of as a reconfigurable co-processor. The chip consists of an array of Look Up Tables (LUT), Flip-Flops (FF), and Digital Signal Processing (DSP) blocks that all can be reprogrammed on the order of milliseconds. To use FPGAs to accelerate an application, the programmer must first implement a design for the chip. The microprocessor can then call the FPGA loaded with this design to accelerate the application.

The easiest example to envision is an application that uses matrix multiply during its calculation. For the best performance, the programmer would call a highly tuned vendor supplied math library like DGEMM, and pass pointers of the matrices being multiplied. In the ideal FPGA situation, the programmer would call a vendor supplied routine called FPGA_DGEMM and pass the same pointers. In the first case, the DGEMM function would be performed on the microprocessor, reading and writing to the microprocessor’s memory. In the second case, the microprocessor would initiate a Direct Memory Access (DMA) transfer, and move the data to memory associated with the attached FPGA, or directly to the memory located within the FPGA. The results would then be calculated using the logic on the FPGA and returned to the microprocessor’s memory.

Obviously the transfer times between the microprocessor and the FPGA can greatly affect the performance, but for our microprocessor comparison consider the FPGA’s capabilities itself. When a microprocessor’s peak performance is quoted, it is usually calculated by the number of 64-bit floating-point operations it can perform per clock, multiplied by the clock frequency of the chip. In the new world of multi-core processors, this calculation has been expanded by multiplying that result by the number of cores on the chip. So a 2.5 GHz dual-core Opteron, which can perform one add and one multiply per clock, has a peak of (2.5 x 2 x 2) = 10 Gflop/s. An FPGA has neither floating-point adders nor multipliers, only generic logic that can be configured any way the user would like. So to get an equivalent type of 64-bit floating-point performance, we need to figure out how many add and multiply function units will fit on an FPGA and at what clock frequency that design might run.

Doing the Calculations

To start this pencil and paper calculation, we need three reference documents from Xilinx: “Virtex-4 Family Overview” (DS112 v1.6), “Virtex-5 Family Overview LX and LXT Platforms” (DS100 v2.1), and “Floating-Point Operator v3.0” (DS 335), all of which are available at http://www.xilinx.com/. Using the first two documents we can find out how many resources are available on the Virtex-4 LX200 and the Virtex-5 LX330 FPGAs. The last document will tell us how many resources are needed to implement 64-bit multiply, add, divide, square root and other functions, and at what clock frequency those function units will run. Dividing the resources needed per function unit into the resources available on the FPGA will tell how many function units will fit on the chip. Multiplying this by the clock frequency of the function units gives us a peak performance for the FPGA, similar to the peak for the Opteron. Here is a table summarizing the resources available on the LX200, LX330 and other Virtex FPGAs.

——– —– ——  ——  ————- ———–
Virtex-4 Speed Logic   DSP48   Block RAM     Total
         MHz   slices  slices  18-bit/36-bit Kbits (MB)
——– —– ——  ——  ————- ———–
LX160    500   67,584  96      288/0         5,185 (0.6)
LX200    500   89,088  96      336/0         6,048 (0.7)
——– —– ——  ——  ————- ———–
Virtex-5 Speed Logic   DSP48E  Block RAM     Total
         MHz   slices  slices  18-bit/36-bit Kbits (MB)
——– —– ——  ——  ————- ———–
LX220    550   34,560  128     384/192        6,912 (0.8)
LX330    550   51,840  192     576/288       10,368 (1.3)

The Virtex-4 LX200 is listed as having 89,088 logic slices and 96 DSP48 slices, and the Virtex-5 LX330 is listed as having 51,840 logic slices and 192 DSP48E slices. Reading the footnotes in those reference documents shows that a Virtex-4 logic slice contains 2 LUTs and 2 FFs whereas the Virtex-5 logic slice contains 4 LUTs and 4 FFs. Similarly, the Virtex-4 DSP48 slices have 18 x 18 bit hardware multiplier/accumulators whereas the Virtex-5 DSP48E slices have 18 x 25 bit hardware multiplier/accumulators.

Before calculating the number of function units that will fit on an FPGA, we need to subtract some portion of the logic slices for the I/O interface. Remember that an FPGA is generic logic, it does not know how to talk to the microprocessor until you implement and load an interface. For the purposes of these calculations we will assume that we need 13,500 slices on the LX200 and 6,750 slices on the LX330. This leaves the LX200 with 75,588 and the LX330 with 44,790 logic slices available for function units.

The other limiting factor for the number of function units that can be placed on an FPGA is the total amount of on-chip memory available for building 64-bit registers that the function units can read and write. The LX200 has only 18-bit dual-port block RAMs and the LX330 has a combination of 18-bit and 36-bit dual-port block RAMs. Dual-ported means the block RAM can read (or write) two values every clock cycle. Grouping these into 64-bit registers we can make  ((336*2)/4) = 168 registers on the LX200 and ((576*2)/4 + (288*2/2)) = 576 registers on the LX330. Assume we will need at most two registers for each function unit since many of them will be chained or pipelined together with one feeding the next. So the upper bound on function units is (168/2) = 84 for the LX200, and (576/2) = 288 for the LX330.

The “Floating-Point Operators” reference shows that we can build 64-bit multipliers three different ways with the full implementation yielding the highest function unit density, so that is what is used in these calculations. We will first implement as many function units as possible using the DSP slices, then fill up the rest of the FPGA with function units built out of only logic slices. This technique will yield the maximum number of function units, but they will all have to run at the slower all-logic clock frequency. The table below uses the expression (dsp+logic):reg to show how many of the function units were built with a combination of DSP and logic slices, and how many are implemented with logic slices alone. The last number in the expression compares that sum against the upper bound imposed by the number of available 64-bit registers made from on-chip memory. The peak Gops/s value is the minimum of these two numbers multiplied by the minimum of the two clock frequencies shown in the next column.

——–  —— —– —– ——  —————  ——— ——
Function  DSP48  LUTs  FFs   Logic    Virtex-4        Freq      Peak
64-bit    slices             slices   LX200           MHz       Gops/s
                                     (dsp+logic):reg  dsp:logic
——–  —— —– —– ——  —————  ——— ——
Multiply  16     550   774   387     (6+59):84        303:185   12.0
Multiply  0      2311  2457  1229        61:84          185     11.3
Adder     0      1274  1139  637        118:84          284     23.9
——–  —— —– —– ——  —————  ——— ——
Function  DSP48E LUTs  FFs   Logic    Virtex-5        Freq      Peak
64-bit    slices             slices   LX330           MHz       Gops/s
                                     (dsp+logic):reg  dsp:logic
——–  —— —– —– ——  —————  ——— ——
Multiply  12     424   669   168     (16+68):288      369:237   19.9
Multiply  0      2309  2457  615          73:288        237     17.3
Adder     0      804   1060  265         170:288        316     53.7

We need to consider one more adjustment to these results before we can compare them to the dual-core 2.5 GHz Opteron. The results above assume there are only multipliers or adders on the chip, not both. If both multipliers and adders are in the same design, we need to make sure we have enough DSP slices for both, and run the mixed design at the slower of the two clock frequencies. After several iterations, the optimal mixed mult/add implementation for the LX200 is 43 multipliers and 43 adders running at a clock frequency of 185 MHz. This design implements 6 multipliers using the DSP full design, 37 multipliers in all logic and 43 adders in logic. For the LX330 the optimal mixed design is 59 multipliers and 59 adders running at 237 MHz. Again using the DSP full implementation for 16 of the multipliers, 43 multipliers in logic slices, and 59 adders in logic. Multiplying that out, the LX200 gets (43+43)*185 = 15.9 Gflop/s and the LX330 gets (59+59)*237 = 28.0 Gflop/s.

              ———   ———   ———
              Opteron     Virtex-4    Virtex-5
              Dual-core   LX200       LX330
              2.5 GHz     185 MHz     237 MHz
              (Gflop/s)  (Gflop/s)   (Gflop/s)
              ———   ———   ———
Mult/Add         10         15.9        28.0
Mult only        5          12.0        19.9
Add only         5          23.9        55.3

Practical Considerations

In terms of market availability, the LX200 and dual-core Opteron are both readily available and can be purchased today. The LX330 is available now, but in very limited numbers, becoming more available towards the end of 2007, so the analysis should be performed again comparing the LX330 with the quad-core Opterons.

Another consideration is the percent of peak that can be obtained. With more flexibility in the FPGA architecture the programmer should be able to achieve a much high percentage of peak on typical code; whereas the more cores that are placed on a multi-core microprocessor the percent or peak continues to fall. One can actually think of an FPGA as a dense multi-core processor with a very fast crossbar connecting all the function units and registers.

Power consumption is another consideration that is getting more important these days. The dual-core Opteron is rated as requiring 95 watts. The pathological worst case power rating for the LX200 in a current system is 42 watts. A more realistic power rating for this design would be about 25 watts on the LX200, with the LX330 being somewhat higher. So the FPGA designs would use about half to one quarter of the power of the Opteron. Considering the lifetime cost of a system, this reduced power consumption would lower the machines operating costs for both electricity and cooling capacity.

A more aggressive design might also consider using a lower precision calculation. 32-bit function units take about a quarter of the real estate as 64-bit floating-point function units, and the on-chip memory would hold twice as many 32-bit registers as 64-bit registers. Since FPGAs are completely programmable, one could use any bit width or numerical representation needed.

Converting from floating-point to fixed-point or integer would greatly benefit the FPGA’s performance.

This pencil and paper exercise shows that FPGAs can be competitive compared to standard microprocessors at 64-bit floating-point operations. Naturally many details have been left out, such as the speed of the interface between the microprocessor and the FPGA, the amount of additional logic needed to implement a given design, and the larger issue pertaining to the amount of programming effort it takes to implement an efficient design on the FPGA. Nevertheless, this article should provide the motivation for programmers to start leaning how to program these accelerators. Programmers who want to experiment with a HyperTransport attached FPGA architecture may wish to look at the Cray XD1 supercomputer with a Virtex-4 LX160 attached per node (www.cray.com/products/xd1/acceleration.html), or the DRC Development System 2000 from DRC Computer Corporation with one or more attached Virtex-4 LX200 (www.drccomputer.com/pdfs/DRC_DS2000_datasheet.pdf).

—–

Dave Strenski is an applications analyst for Cray Inc., which designs and manufactures high performance computing systems. Prior to Cray, Dave held a variety of technical positions at several computer and research organizations. He holds degrees in Land Surveying, Civil and Mechanical Engineering. His publications include works in the areas of parallel computing, numerical consistency, genomic data searching algorithms, and field programmable gate arrays. He also holds a patent on a meshing algorithm for threaded fasteners. As a hobby, Dave plays with solar power.

Subscribe to HPCwire's Weekly Update!

Be the most informed person in the room! Stay ahead of the tech trends with industy updates delivered to you every week!

URISC@SC17 and the #LongestLastMile

January 11, 2018

A multinational delegation recently attended the Understanding Risk in Shared CyberEcosystems workshop, or URISC@SC17, in Denver, Colorado. URISC participants and presenters from 11 countries, including eight African nations, 12 U.S. states, Canada, India and Nepal, also attended SC17, the annual international conference for high performance computing, networking, storage and analysis that drew nearly 13,000 attendees. Read more…

By Elizabeth Leake, STEM-Trek Nonprofit

When the Chips Are Down

January 11, 2018

In the last article, "The High Stakes Semiconductor Game that Drives HPC Diversity," I alluded to the challenges facing the semiconductor industry and how that may impact the evolution of HPC systems over the next few years. I thought I’d lift the covers a little and look at some of the commercial challenges that impact the component technology we use in HPC. Read more…

By Dairsie Latimer

Intel, Micron to Go Their Separate 3D NAND Ways

January 10, 2018

The announcement on Monday (Jan. 8) that Intel and Micron have decided to “update” – that is, end – their long-term joint development partnership for 3D NAND technology is nearly as interesting an exercise in pub Read more…

By Doug Black

HPE Extreme Performance Solutions

The Living Heart Project Wins Three Prestigious Awards for HPC Simulation

Imagine creating a treatment plan for a patient on the other side of the world, or testing a drug without ever putting subjects at risk. Read more…

How Meltdown and Spectre Patches Will Affect HPC Workloads

January 10, 2018

There have been claims that the fixes for the Meltdown and Spectre security vulnerabilities, named the KPTI (aka KAISER) patches, are going to affect application performance by 10-30 percent. The patch makes any call fro Read more…

By Rosemary Francis

When the Chips Are Down

January 11, 2018

In the last article, "The High Stakes Semiconductor Game that Drives HPC Diversity," I alluded to the challenges facing the semiconductor industry and how that may impact the evolution of HPC systems over the next few years. I thought I’d lift the covers a little and look at some of the commercial challenges that impact the component technology we use in HPC. Read more…

By Dairsie Latimer

How Meltdown and Spectre Patches Will Affect HPC Workloads

January 10, 2018

There have been claims that the fixes for the Meltdown and Spectre security vulnerabilities, named the KPTI (aka KAISER) patches, are going to affect applicatio Read more…

By Rosemary Francis

Momentum Builds for US Exascale

January 9, 2018

2018 looks to be a great year for the U.S. exascale program. The last several months of 2017 revealed a number of important developments that help put the U.S. Read more…

By Alex R. Larzelere

ANL’s Rick Stevens on CANDLE, ARM, Quantum, and More

January 8, 2018

Late last year HPCwire caught up with Rick Stevens, associate laboratory director for computing, environment and life Sciences at Argonne National Laboratory, f Read more…

By John Russell

Chip Flaws ‘Meltdown’ and ‘Spectre’ Loom Large

January 4, 2018

The HPC and wider tech community have been abuzz this week over the discovery of critical design flaws that impact virtually all contemporary microprocessors. T Read more…

By Tiffany Trader

The @hpcnotes Predictions for HPC in 2018

January 4, 2018

I’m not averse to making predictions about the world of High Performance Computing (and Supercomputing, Cloud, etc.) in person at conferences, meetings, causa Read more…

By Andrew Jones

Fast Forward: Five HPC Predictions for 2018

December 21, 2017

What’s on your list of high (and low) lights for 2017? Volta 100’s arrival on the heels of the P100? Appearance, albeit late in the year, of IBM’s Power9? Read more…

By John Russell

Independent Hyperion Research Will Chart its Own Course

December 19, 2017

Hyperion Research, formerly the HPC research and consulting practice within IDC, has become an independent company with Earl Joseph, the long-time leader of the Read more…

By John Russell

US Coalesces Plans for First Exascale Supercomputer: Aurora in 2021

September 27, 2017

At the Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee (ASCAC) meeting, in Arlington, Va., yesterday (Sept. 26), it was revealed that the "Aurora" supercompute Read more…

By Tiffany Trader

Japan Unveils Quantum Neural Network

November 22, 2017

The U.S. and China are leading the race toward productive quantum computing, but it's early enough that ultimate leadership is still something of an open questi Read more…

By Tiffany Trader

AMD Showcases Growing Portfolio of EPYC and Radeon-based Systems at SC17

November 13, 2017

AMD’s charge back into HPC and the datacenter is on full display at SC17. Having launched the EPYC processor line in June along with its MI25 GPU the focus he Read more…

By John Russell

Nvidia Responds to Google TPU Benchmarking

April 10, 2017

Nvidia highlights strengths of its newest GPU silicon in response to Google's report on the performance and energy advantages of its custom tensor processor. Read more…

By Tiffany Trader

IBM Begins Power9 Rollout with Backing from DOE, Google

December 6, 2017

After over a year of buildup, IBM is unveiling its first Power9 system based on the same architecture as the Department of Energy CORAL supercomputers, Summit a Read more…

By Tiffany Trader

Fast Forward: Five HPC Predictions for 2018

December 21, 2017

What’s on your list of high (and low) lights for 2017? Volta 100’s arrival on the heels of the P100? Appearance, albeit late in the year, of IBM’s Power9? Read more…

By John Russell

GlobalFoundries Puts Wind in AMD’s Sails with 12nm FinFET

September 24, 2017

From its annual tech conference last week (Sept. 20), where GlobalFoundries welcomed more than 600 semiconductor professionals (reaching the Santa Clara venue Read more…

By Tiffany Trader

Chip Flaws ‘Meltdown’ and ‘Spectre’ Loom Large

January 4, 2018

The HPC and wider tech community have been abuzz this week over the discovery of critical design flaws that impact virtually all contemporary microprocessors. T Read more…

By Tiffany Trader

Leading Solution Providers

Perspective: What Really Happened at SC17?

November 22, 2017

SC is over. Now comes the myriad of follow-ups. Inboxes are filled with templated emails from vendors and other exhibitors hoping to win a place in the post-SC thinking of booth visitors. Attendees of tutorials, workshops and other technical sessions will be inundated with requests for feedback. Read more…

By Andrew Jones

Tensors Come of Age: Why the AI Revolution Will Help HPC

November 13, 2017

Thirty years ago, parallel computing was coming of age. A bitter battle began between stalwart vector computing supporters and advocates of various approaches to parallel computing. IBM skeptic Alan Karp, reacting to announcements of nCUBE’s 1024-microprocessor system and Thinking Machines’ 65,536-element array, made a public $100 wager that no one could get a parallel speedup of over 200 on real HPC workloads. Read more…

By John Gustafson & Lenore Mullin

Delays, Smoke, Records & Markets – A Candid Conversation with Cray CEO Peter Ungaro

October 5, 2017

Earlier this month, Tom Tabor, publisher of HPCwire and I had a very personal conversation with Cray CEO Peter Ungaro. Cray has been on something of a Cinderell Read more…

By Tiffany Trader & Tom Tabor

Flipping the Flops and Reading the Top500 Tea Leaves

November 13, 2017

The 50th edition of the Top500 list, the biannual publication of the world’s fastest supercomputers based on public Linpack benchmarking results, was released Read more…

By Tiffany Trader

GlobalFoundries, Ayar Labs Team Up to Commercialize Optical I/O

December 4, 2017

GlobalFoundries (GF) and Ayar Labs, a startup focused on using light, instead of electricity, to transfer data between chips, today announced they've entered in Read more…

By Tiffany Trader

HPC Chips – A Veritable Smorgasbord?

October 10, 2017

For the first time since AMD's ill-fated launch of Bulldozer the answer to the question, 'Which CPU will be in my next HPC system?' doesn't have to be 'Whichever variety of Intel Xeon E5 they are selling when we procure'. Read more…

By Dairsie Latimer

Nvidia, Partners Announce Several V100 Servers

September 27, 2017

Here come the Volta 100-based servers. Nvidia today announced an impressive line-up of servers from major partners – Dell EMC, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, IBM Read more…

By John Russell

Intel Delivers 17-Qubit Quantum Chip to European Research Partner

October 10, 2017

On Tuesday, Intel delivered a 17-qubit superconducting test chip to research partner QuTech, the quantum research institute of Delft University of Technology (TU Delft) in the Netherlands. The announcement marks a major milestone in the 10-year, $50-million collaborative relationship with TU Delft and TNO, the Dutch Organization for Applied Research, to accelerate advancements in quantum computing. Read more…

By Tiffany Trader

  • arrow
  • Click Here for More Headlines
  • arrow
Share This