Hybrid Optoelectric On-chip Interconnect Networks
Yong-jin Kwon
1
Target Manycore System
2
On-chip network topology spectrum
Increasing radix
Increasing diameter
Mesh CMesh Clos Crossbar
3
Related Works
[Shacham’07][Petracca’08]
[Vantrease’08][Psota’07][Kirman’06]
[NOCS’09][Pan’09]
Mesh CMesh Clos Crossbar
4
Outline
• Technology Background• Previous Studies and Motivation• Performance Analysis• Power Analysis• Conclusion
5
Photonic technology – photonic link
6
Silicon photonic link – Coupler
7
Coupler loss = 1 dB
Silicon photonic link – Ring modulator
8
Modulator insertion loss = 0 – 1 dB
Energy spent in E-O conversion = 25 – 90 fJ/bt
(independent of link length)
Silicon photonic link – Waveguide
9
Waveguide loss = 0 – 5 dB/cm
Silicon photonic link – Ring filter, photodetector
10
Filter drop loss = 1.5 dB
Photodetector loss = 0.1 dB
Energy spent in O-E conversion = 25 - 60 fJ/bt
(independent of link length)
Receiver sensitivity = -20 dBm
11
Silicon photonic link – WDM Through ring loss = 1e-
4 – 1e-2 dB/ring
• Dense WDM (128 λ/wg, 10 Gbps/λ) improves bandwidth density (30x!!)
12
Silicon photonic link – Energy cost
• E-O-E conversion cost – 50-150 fJ/bt (independent of length)
• Thermal tuning energy (increases with ring count)• External laser power (dependent on losses in
photonic devices)
Silicon Photo
13
14
Electrical technology
• Design constraints– 22 nm technology– 500 nm pitch– 5 GHz clock
• Design parameters– Wire width– Repeater size– Repeater spacing
FF FF FFRepeaters Repeaters
Repeater inserted pipelined wires
1.0 mm
2.5 mm
5.0 mm
7.5 mm
10.0 mm
15
Electrical technology
• Design constraints– 22 nm technology– 500 nm pitch– 5 GHz clock
• Design parameters– Wire width– Repeater size– Repeater spacing
FF FF FFRepeaters Repeaters
Repeater inserted pipelined wires
1.0 mm
2.5 mm
5.0 mm
7.5 mm
10.0 mm
16
Electrical vs Optical links – Energy cost
Thermal tuning energy
Transmitter-Receiver energy
Elec: ElectricalOpt-A: Optical-AggressiveOpt-C: Optical-Conservative
Optical laser power not shown
(dependent on the physical layout)
Outline
• Technology Background• Previous Studies and Motivation• Proposed Design• Performance and Power Analysis• Conclusion
17
18
Clos Network
19
Photonic Clos for a 64-tile system
20
Power-Bandwidth tradeoff
CMeshX2Channel width = 128b
PClosChannel width = 64b
PClosChannel width = 128b
Off-chip laser power = 3.3 WComparable on-chip power for local traffic
Problems and Motivations
• A mesh-like topology is highly optimized for local communication and hard to beat– Solution: use a underlying mesh topology
• A fully photonic network has higher power numbers on low utilization – Solution: make the photonic channels to be
turned off at low utilization
21
What Do We Need?
• An electrical network which connects all-to-all even when the laser is turned off
• A photonic network which (when turned on) provides benefits to the base electrical mesh
22
Outline
• Technology Background• Previous Studies and Motivation• Proposed Design• Performance and Power Analysis• Conclusion
23
Concentrated Mesh with Photonic Express Channels
24
Express1 Express2
Outline
• Technology Background• Previous Studies and Motivation• Proposed Design• Performance and Power Analysis• Conclusion
25
Performance
26
Power - Electrical
27
Photonic vs Electric Power Comparison
28
Outline
• Technology Background• Previous Studies and Motivation• Proposed Design• Performance and Power Analysis• Conclusion
29
Conclusion
• Maybe we do not need to shut down photonics on low utilization
• In order for photonics to be effective we need better devices– There is no power advantage in using photonics if
we can’t get to aggressive– We do win in bandwidth density but area is cheap
30
Acknowledgement
• Ajay Joshi – Help in power calculations and images
• Chris Batten– Brainstorming help
31
Thanks for your time
32