2012Unpublished venueRequires access

Tradeoff between delay and area in gate sizing using Geometric Programming

Gracieli Posser, Guilherme Flach, Gustavo Wilke, Ricardo Reis

Open publisher page 2 citations

Abstract

A study about the tradeoff between delay and area (power) is presented in this work considering circuit gate sizing. We use a gate sizing tool based on Geometric Programming (GP), where delay is calculated by Elmore delay model. The optimization can be done targeting both delay and area (power) minimization. Tests were performed mapping ISCAS'85 benchmark circuits for 45nm technology. First, circuits were mapped to a typical standard cell library. Then, the gate sizing targeting delay minimization was performed. After, the circuits were sized targeting area considering a delay constraint. Three different delay constraints were considered, the minimum delay given by delay optimization and this minimum delay relaxed by 1% and by 5%. The energy/delay gain (EDG) metric was used to quantify the most efficient tradeoff. Considering the minimum delay, area (power) was reduced in 28.2%, on average. Area (power) was reduced in 41.7%, on average, when the delay was relaxed by 1% and the EDG metric was 41.7. Relaxing delay by 5%, was able to reduce area in 51%, on average, and EDG metric was 10.2.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A study about the tradeoff between delay and area (power) is presented in this work considering circuit gate sizing. We use a gate sizing tool based on Geometric Programming (GP), where delay is calculated by Elmore delay model. The optimization can be done targeting both delay and area (power) minimization. Tests were performed mapping ISCAS'85 benchmark circuits for 45nm technology. First, circuits were mapped to a typical standard cell library. Then, the gate sizing targeting delay minimization was performed. After, the circuits were sized targeting area considering a delay constraint. Three different delay constraints were considered, the minimum delay given by delay optimization and this minimum delay relaxed by 1% and by 5%. The energy/delay gain (EDG) metric was used to quantify the most efficient tradeoff. Considering the minimum delay, area (power) was reduced in 28.2%, on average. Area (power) was reduced in 41.7%, on average, when the delay was relaxed by 1% and the EDG metric was 41.7. Relaxing delay by 5%, was able to reduce area in 51%, on average, and EDG metric was 10.2.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A study about the tradeoff between delay and area (power) is presented in this work considering circuit gate sizing. We use a gate sizing tool based on Geometric Programming (GP), where delay is calculated by Elmore delay model. The optimization can be done targeting both delay and area (power) minimization. Tests were performed mapping ISCAS'85 benchmark circuits for 45nm technology. First, circuits were mapped to a typical standard cell library. Then, the gate sizing targeting delay minimization was performed. After, the circuits were sized targeting area considering a delay constraint. Three different delay constraints were considered, the minimum delay given by delay optimization and this minimum delay relaxed by 1% and by 5%. The energy/delay gain (EDG) metric was used to quantify the most efficient tradeoff. Considering the minimum delay, area (power) was reduced in 28.2%, on average. Area (power) was reduced in 41.7%, on average, when the delay was relaxed by 1% and the EDG metric was 41.7. Relaxing delay by 5%, was able to reduce area in 51%, on average, and EDG metric was 10.2.

Key concepts: Elmore delay, Delay calculation, Metric (unit), Geometric programming, Benchmark (surveying), Minification, Computer science, Propagation delay

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Tradeoff between delay and area in gate sizing using Geometric Programming — Research Paper | ScholarLens