Software-Defined Super Cores for High IPC and Power Efficiency

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

High performance cores through frequency turbo are inefficient in terms of performance per watt, and larger cores come at the cost of core count, with existing architectures having a fixed inflexible ratio of performance and efficiency cores.

Innovation Solution

Software defined super cores (SDC) aggregate the Instructions-per-Cycle (IPC) capabilities of neighboring cores into a 'super core' by virtually fusing them to run different portions of an application's instructions while maintaining in-order retirement, reducing process technology node dependence on scaling core size.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If frequency turbo is used to achieve high performance cores, then performance is improved, but performance per watt efficiency deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveperformanceVSAvoidperformance per watt efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The processor is segmented into different core types (performance cores and efficiency cores) with distinct architectural characteristics. Performance cores are optimized for high IPC and throughput, while efficiency cores are optimized for power consumption, allowing the system to segment workloads appropriately to achieve both high performance and energy efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically schedules threads across different core types based on workload characteristics. The scheduler can dynamically migrate threads between performance and efficiency cores, adjusting the allocation in real-time to optimize the balance between performance and power consumption based on current system demands.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Productivity

If larger (deeper/wider) high IPC cores are built, then single thread performance is improved, but core count deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesingle thread performanceVSAvoidcore count
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of building a single large core, the architecture segments the processing capacity into multiple smaller cores with different specializations. This allows the system to maintain high core count while achieving high single-thread performance through the coordinated operation of efficiency cores for general workloads and performance cores for demanding tasks.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different cores are designed with local quality optimizations tailored to their specific functions. Efficiency cores are optimized for power efficiency and general-purpose workloads, while performance cores are optimized for high IPC and throughput. This local optimization allows each core type to excel at its intended purpose without compromising the overall system capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Adaptability or versatility

If performance and efficiency core style architectures are used, then balance between single thread and multithread performance is improved, but device complexity deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebalance between single thread and multithread performanceVSAvoidcore design complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Both performance and efficiency cores are designed to be universally schedulable and interchangeable in the context of thread placement. The scheduler treats both core types as part of a unified resource pool, assigning threads based on workload characteristics rather than core type restrictions. This universality simplifies the scheduling architecture while maintaining the ability to balance single-thread and multithread performance requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The architecture changes key parameters such as IPC, power consumption, and core count to create distinct core types. By adjusting these parameters during the design phase, the system achieves the desired balance between performance and efficiency without requiring complex runtime configuration or migration mechanisms, thereby reducing overall device complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS20250217160A1Software defined super cores
Publication Date: 2025.07.03 INTEL CORP
  • US20250217160A1 patent drawing
  • US20250217160A1 patent drawing
  • US20250217160A1 patent drawing

AI summary

Techniques for software defined super core usage are described. In some examples, in super core mode each of a first processor core and a second processor core is to include circuitry to support the first and the second processor core to operate in a single virtual core as configured by the operating system to execute the first set of instruction segments of the single threaded program and the second set of instruction segments of the single threaded program concurrently.