计算机组成与设计习题答案,计算机组成与设计硬件软件接口--课后习题答案

1、 Part II: Solutions Guide52Instructors Manual for Computer Organization and Design1.1q1.2u1.3f1.4a1.5c1.6d1.7i1.8k1.9j1.10o1.11w1.12p1.13n1.14r1.15y1.16s1.17l1.18g1.19x1.20z1.21t1.22b1.23h1.24m1.25e1.26v1.27j1.28b1.29f1.30j1.31i1.32e1SolutionsPart II: Solutions Guide531.33d1.34g1.35c1.36g1.37d1.38c1.39j1.40b1.41f1.42h1.43a1.44a1.45Time for Time for 1.46As discussed in section 1.4, die costs rise very fast with increasing die area. Con- sider a wafer with a large number of defects. It is quite li。

2、kely that if the die area is very small, some dies will escape with no defects. On the other hand, if the die area is very large, it might be likely that every die has one or more defects. In general, then, die area greatly affects yield (as the equations on page 48 indicate), and so we would expect that dies from wafer B would cost much more than dies from wafer A.1.47The die area of the Pentium processor in Figure 1.16 is 91 mm2and it contains about 3.3 million transistors, or roughly 36,000 p。

3、er square millimeter. If we assume the period has an area of roughly .1 mm2, it would contain 3500 transistors (this is certainly a very rough estimate). Similar calculations with regard to Figure 1.26 and the Intel 4004 result in 191 transistors per square millimeter or roughly 19 transistors.1.48We can write Dies per wafer = f(Die area)1) and Yield = f(Die area)2) and thus Cost per die = f(Die area)3). More formally, we can write: 1.49No solution provided.1.50From the caption in Figure 1.16 we。

4、 have 198 dies at 100% yield. If the defect density is 1 per square centimeter, then the yield is approximated by 1/(1 + 1 .91/2)2) = .47. Thus 198 .47 = 93 dies with a cost of $1000/93 = $10.75 per die.1.51Defects per area.1 2- - revolution1 2- - = rev1 5400- - minutes rev- -60 ondssec minute- -5.56 ms =1 2- - revolution1 2- - = rev1 7200- - minutes rev- -60 ondssec minute- -4.17 ms =Cost per dieCost per wafer Dies per waferyield - -=Dies per waferWafer area Die area- -=Yield1 1Defect per areaD。

5、ie area 2 + () 2- -=54Instructors Manual for Computer Organization and Design1.521.531.54No solution provided.1.55No solution provided.1.56No solution provided.1980Die area0.16Yield0.48Defect density17.041992Die area0.97Yield0.48Defect density1.981992 + 1980Improvement8.62Yield1 1Defects per areaDie area 2 + () 2- -=Part II: Solutions Guide552.1For program 1, M2 is 2.0 (10/5) times as fast as M1. For program 2, M1 is 1.33 (4/3) times as fast as M2.2.2Since we know the number of instructions exec。

6、uted and the time it took to execute the instructions, we can easily calculate the number of instructions per second while running program 1 as (200 106)/10 = 20 106for M1 and (160 106)/5 = 32 106for M2.2.3We know that Cycles per instruction = Cycles per second / Instructions per sec- ond. For M1 we thus have a CPI of 200 106cycles per second / 20 106instructions per second = 10 cycles per instruction. For M2 we have 300/32 = 9.4 cycles per instruc- tion.2.4We are given the number of cycles per 。

7、second and the number of seconds, so we can calculate the number of required cycles for each machine. If we divide this by the CPI well get the number of instructions. For M1, we have 3 seconds 200 106cy- cles/second = 600 106cycles per program / 10 cycles per instruction = 60 106in- structions per program. For M2, we have 4 seconds 300 106cycles/second = 1200 106cycles per program / 9.4 cycles per instruction = 127.7 106instructions per pro- gram.2.5M2 is twice as fast as M1, but it does not co。

8、st twice as much. M2 is clearly the ma- chine to purchase.2.6If we multiply the cost by the execution time, we are multiplying two quantities, for each of which smaller numbers are preferred. For this reason, cost times execution time is a good metric, and we would choose the machine with a smaller value. In the example, we get $10,000 10 seconds = 100,000 for M1 vs. $15,000 5 seconds = 75,000 for M2, and thus M2 is the better choice. If we used cost divided by execution time and assume we choos。

9、e the machine with the larger value, then a machine with a ridiculous- ly high cost would be chosen. This makes no sense. If we choose the machine with the smaller value, then a machine with a ridiculously high execution time would be cho- sen. This too makes no sense.2.7We would define cost-effectiveness as performance divided by cost. This is essen- tially (1/Execution time) (1/Cost), and in both cases larger numbers are more cost- effective when we multiply. 2.8We can use the method in Exercise 2.7, but the execution time is the sum of the two execut。

《计算机组成与设计硬件软件接口--课后习题答案》由会员wt****50分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《计算机组成与设计硬件软件接口--课后习题答案》请在金锄头文库上搜索。