Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1704.04760

In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit

Norman P. Jouppi·Cliff Young·Nishant Patil·David Patterson·Gaurav Agrawal·Raminder Bajwa·Sarah Bates·Suresh Bhatia·Nan Boden·Al Borchers·Rick Boyle·Pierre-luc Cantin·Clifford Chao·Chris Clark·Jeremy Coriell·Mike Daley·Matt Dau·Jeffrey Dean·Ben Gelb·Tara Vazir Ghaemmaghami·Rajendra Gottipati·William Gulland·Robert Hagmann·C. Richard Ho·Doug Hogberg·John Hu·Robert Hundt·Dan Hurt·Julian Ibarz·Aaron Jaffey·Alek Jaworski·Alexander Kaplan·Harshit Khaitan·Andy Koch·Naveen Kumar·Steve Lacy·James Laudon·James Law·Diemthu Le·Chris Leary·Zhuyuan Liu·Kyle Lucke·Alan Lundin·Gordon MacKean·Adriana Maggiore·Maire Mahony·Kieran Miller·Rahul Nagarajan·Ravi Narayanaswami·Ray Ni·Kathy Nix·Thomas Norrie·Mark Omernick·Narayana Penukonda·Andy Phelps·Jonathan Ross·Matt Ross·Amir Salek·Emad Samadiani·Chris Severn·Gregory Sizikov·Matthew Snelham·Jed Souter·Dan Steinberg·Andy Swing·Mercedes Tan·Gregory Thorson·Bo Tian·Horia Toma·Erick Tuttle·Vijay Vasudevan·Richard Walter·Walter Wang·Eric Wilcox·Doe Hyun Yoon
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Many architects believe that major improvements in cost-energy-performance must now come from domain-specific hardware. This paper evaluates a custom ASIC---called a Tensor Processing Unit (TPU)---deployed in datacenters since 2015 that accelerates the inference phase of neural networks (NN). The heart of the TPU is a 65,536 8-bit MAC matrix multiply unit that offers a peak throughput of 92 TeraOps/second (TOPS) and a large (28 MiB) software-managed on-chip memory. The TPU's deterministic execution model is a better match to the 99th-percentile response-time requirement of our NN applications than are the time-varying optimizations of CPUs and GPUs (caches, out-of-order execution, multithreading, multiprocessing, prefetching, ...) that help average throughput more than guaranteed latency. The lack of such features helps explain why, despite having myriad MACs and a big memory, the TPU is relatively small and low power. We compare the TPU to a server-class Intel Haswell CPU and an Nvidia K80 GPU, which are contemporaries deployed in the same datacenters. Our workload, written in the high-level TensorFlow framework, uses production NN applications (MLPs, CNNs, and LSTMs) that represent 95% of our datacenters' NN inference demand. Despite low utilization for some applications, the TPU is on average about 15X - 30X faster than its contemporary GPU or CPU, with TOPS/Watt about 30X - 80X higher. Moreover, using the GPU's GDDR5 memory in the TPU would triple achieved TOPS and raise TOPS/Watt to nearly 70X the GPU and 200X the CPU.

Explore related subjects

cs.ARcs.LGcs.NE

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Norman P. Jouppi, Cliff Young, Nishant Patil, David Patterson, Gaurav Agrawal, Raminder Bajwa, Sarah Bates, Suresh Bhatia, Nan Boden, Al Borchers, Rick Boyle, Pierre-luc Cantin, Clifford Chao, Chris Clark, Jeremy Coriell, Mike Daley, Matt Dau, Jeffrey Dean, Ben Gelb, Tara Vazir Ghaemmaghami, Rajendra Gottipati, William Gulland, Robert Hagmann, C. Richard Ho, Doug Hogberg, John Hu, Robert Hundt, Dan Hurt, Julian Ibarz, Aaron Jaffey, Alek Jaworski, Alexander Kaplan, Harshit Khaitan, Andy Koch, Naveen Kumar, Steve Lacy, James Laudon, James Law, Diemthu Le, Chris Leary, Zhuyuan Liu, Kyle Lucke, Alan Lundin, Gordon MacKean, Adriana Maggiore, Maire Mahony, Kieran Miller, Rahul Nagarajan, Ravi Narayanaswami, Ray Ni, Kathy Nix, Thomas Norrie, Mark Omernick, Narayana Penukonda, Andy Phelps, Jonathan Ross, Matt Ross, Amir Salek, Emad Samadiani, Chris Severn, Gregory Sizikov, Matthew Snelham, Jed Souter, Dan Steinberg, Andy Swing, Mercedes Tan, Gregory Thorson, Bo Tian, Horia Toma, Erick Tuttle, Vijay Vasudevan, Richard Walter, Walter Wang, Eric Wilcox, Doe Hyun Yoon. 2017-04-16. In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit. https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.04760

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Fengshui: Demystifying Chiplet Ecosystem and Bespoke Neural Network Accelerator Codesign

Modern ML workloads, with stringent latency and energy constraints, are increasingly hard to run efficiently on homogeneous commodity hardware. We argue that operator-level disaggregation--tailoring microarchitecture, batching, and memory hierarchy to each operator--is essential to overcome these limitations, though the resulting highly bespoke accelerators incur prohibitive Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) costs. Chiplet-based integration amortizes NRE across applications, but choosing which chiplets to build and how to compose them into accelerators is circularly dependent--a chiplet pool's value depends on the constructed accelerators, while accelerator quality is constrained by available chiplets. This paper introduces Fengshui, a chiplet ecosystem and accelerator co-design framework that jointly optimizes chiplet pool composition and bespoke application-specific integrated circuit (BASIC) design. Fengshui constructs BASICs through operator-level disaggregation, co-exploring chiplet and memory heterogeneity, tensor fusion, and pipeline/tensor/expert parallelism with place-and-route validation for physical implementability. With just 8 strategically selected chiplets, encompassing network switches, processing-in-memory units, and accelerators with diverse microarchitectures, Fengshui-generated BASICs achieve 48.5%, 88.1%, 93.0%, and 97.8% reductions in energy, energy-cost product (EC), energy-delay product (EDP), and energy-delay-cost product (EDPC) over homogeneous accelerators, while scoring within 4.1% of unconstrained heterogeneous designs across diverse neural networks. For datacenter MoE and dense LLM serving, Fengshui reduces prefill energy and EC by up to 16.8% and 28.7%, respectively; for edge autonomous vehicle perception, it achieves 12.0% energy and 23.6% EC reductions under real-time latency constraints.

cs.AR↗
arXiv2026

BEACON: A Versatile Accelerator for Computational Pathology Applications

While accelerators for AI have seen great commercial success, it is challenging to replicate that success for other specialized domains due to a number of factors. We make the case that barriers for new accelerators can be lowered by starting with a baseline AI accelerator, and adding minimal logic to support new operators demanded by new specialized domains. This leads to a versatile chip that can be manufactured at high volume and deployed for a range of popular applications. We refer to this as the AI+X approach. This paper explores its potential for the emerging domain of Computational Pathology, which involves analysis of large whole-slide tissue images with a multi-stage pipeline. The pipeline requires support for a number of different kernels and operators - early stages perform segmentation and feature extraction, followed by graph creation with k nearest neighbor (kNN) algorithms, and finally inference with an iterative graph convolutional network (GCN) that alternates between Aggregation and Combination. We show that these stages execute inefficiently on a range of baseline CPU, GPU, AI, and GCN accelerators. That inefficiency is addressed with a combination of software re-structuring and small modifications to a baseline systolic AI accelerator. Many of the above kernels can be mapped to a systolic accelerator by offering a flexible datapath between processing elements and register access mechanisms. We add support for feature aggregation, load balanced execution, Euclidean distance calculation, binning, and counter aggregation. This additional flexibility and logic grows the area of a baseline AI chiplet by 1.1x, but by avoiding the memory wall and offering high parallelism, the proposed accelerator BEACON yields over an order of magnitude higher throughput for Computational Pathology than baseline CPU and GPU platforms.

cs.AR↗
arXiv2026

Bio-inspired Learning and Decision-Making with Probabilistic In-Memory Computing Hardware: Part 2

This report extends our previous work (Part 1), which introduced an energy-based model for learning and decision-making under uncertainty. The model leverages stochastic Langevin dynamics to continuously evolve approximate probability distributions over neuron states and model weights. However, as noted in Part 1 and confirmed through GPU-based implementations, large-scale probabilistic energy-based models of this nature face significant scalability challenges due to excessive execution latency. This latency stems from a fundamental mismatch: massively parallel models with low arithmetic intensity (such as energy-based models) are being executed on processor architectures like GPUs that rely on high-bandwidth memory (HBM) interfaces. The HBM imposes brutally sequential execution constraints on inherently parallelizable models, creating the false impression that such models are unscalable. In reality, it is the GPU architecture itself, with its dependence on HBM interfaces, that is not a scalable processor architecture for this class of AI model. In this report, we demonstrate using a detailed transaction-level model (TLM) of a probabilistic analogue in-memory computing (AIMC) processor that the same energy-based model can execute well over 1000x faster than data-center-grade hardware by eliminating the HBM interface and performing computation directly within on-chip memory.

cs.AR↗