In single core case, there is a 1 MB L2 cache. In 4-core case, each core has 
its own private L2 cache of size 1 MB. As they are not shared, i dont 
understand the reason for different cache miss rates.

Best,
Fulya Kaplan

> On Nov 4, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "Tao Zhang" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Fulya,
>  
> What’s the L2 cache size of the 1-core test? Is it equal to the total 
> capacity of 4-core case? The stats indicates that 4-core test has less L2 
> cache miss rate, which may be the reason of IPC improvement.
>  
> -Tao
>  
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On 
> Behalf Of Fulya Kaplan
> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 10:20 AM
> To: gem5 users mailing list
> Subject: [gem5-users] Weird IPC statistics for Spec2006 Multiprogram mode
>  
> Hi all,
> I am running Spec 2006 on X86 with the version gem5-stable-07352f119e48. I am 
> using multiprogram mode with syscall emulation. I am trying to compare the 
> IPC statistics for 2 cases:
> 1)Running benchmark A on a single core
> 2)Running 4 instances of benchmark A on a 4-core system with 1MB private L2 
> cashes.
> All parameters are the same for the 2 runs except the number of cores.
> I am expecting some IPC decrease for the 4-core case as the cores will share 
> the same system bus. However, for CactusADM and Soplex benchmarks, I see 
> higher IPC for case2 compared to case 1.
> I look at the same phase of execution for both runs. I fastforward for 2 
> billion instructions and grab the ipc for each of the cores corresponding to 
> the next 100 million instructions in detailed mode.
> I ll report some other statistics for CactusADM to give a better idea of what 
> is going on.
> Case 1: ipc=0.664141, L2_overall _accesses=573746, L2_miss_rate=0.616
> Case 2: cpu0_ipc=0.718562, cpu1_ipc= 0.720464, cpu2_ipc=0.717405, cpu3_ipc= 
> 0.716513
>             L2_0_accesses=591607, L2_1_accesses=581846, L2_2_accesses=568095, 
> L2_3_accesses=561180, L2_0_missrate=0.452978, L2_1_missrate=0.454510, 
> L2_2_missrate=0.475646, L2_3_missrate=0.488171
>  
> Case 1:Running Time for 100M insts = 0.0716 sec
> Case 2:Running Time for 100M insts = 0.066273 sec
>  
> Do you have any idea what could be the problem? Actually, is this a problem 
> or something expected for some benchmarks?
> Best,
> Fulya Kaplan
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> gem5-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users
_______________________________________________
gem5-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem5-users

Reply via email to