Session 10 The ISPD 2005 Placement Contest 1

Session 10: The ISPD 2005 Placement Contest 1

Outline q Benchmark & Contest Introduction q Individual placement presentation q Fast. Place, Capo, m. PL, Feng. Shui, APlace, NTUPlace, m. FAR, Kraftwerk&Domino, Dragon 2005 q Result Announcement q Conclusion & Future Work 2

The ISPD 2005 Placement Contest and Benchmark Suite Gi-Joon Nam, Charles J. Alpert, Paul G. Villarrubia, Bruce Winter and Mehmet Yildiz IBM Corp. 3

ISPD 2005 Placement Benchmark Suite Name #Objs #Movs #Fixed #Nets #Total Pins #Pins from M #Pins from F Peri. IOs Density% adaptec 1 211 K 210904 543 221142 944053 923513 20540 480 75. 71 adaptec 2 255 K 254457 566 266009 1069482 1045699 23783 407 78. 59 adaptec 3 452 K 450927 723 466758 1875039 1843852 31187 0 74. 53 adaptec 4 496 K 494716 1329 515951 1912420 1876563 35857 0 62. 67 bigblue 1 278 K 277604 560 284479 1144691 1131856 12835 528 54. 19 bigblue 2 558 K 534782 23084 577235 2122282 1979597 142685 0 61. 80 bigblue 3 1097 K 1095519 1293 1123170 3833218 3790107 43111 0 85. 65 bigblue 4 2177 K 2169183 8170 2229886 8900078 8710667 189411 0 65. 30 4

ISPD 2005 Placement Benchmark Suite 5

ISPD 2005 Placement Benchmark Suite 6

ISPD 2005 Placement Benchmark Suite q Real industrial ASIC designs q Free space q 54% - 85% q Affects wire-length significantly q Macros q Wider distribution of cell sizes q I/Os: perimeter and area array I/Os q Various row configuration q Clock logic included 7

ISPD 2005 Placement Contest q Open contest primarily for academic physical design community q Covers majority of placement tools q Fast. Place, Capo, m. PL, Feng. Shui, APlace, NTUPlace, m. FAR, Kraftwerk&Domino, Dragon 2005 q Goals q To provide new modern placement benchmarks q To encourage to expose placement tools and results q To provide an educational forum on the state-of-theart placement algorithms 8

Contest Format q Each team is given 5 days to come up with the best results they can get q Fixed window of time q No limit on CPU resources q Quality metrics q Legality q Half-perimeter bounding box wire length q No timing metric q No congestion metric 9

Contest Timeline q q Jan. 12: Sample benchmarks released Mar. 20: Contest benchmarks posted Mar. 25: Solution submission due Apr. 6: Results announcement 10

Outline q Benchmark & Contest Introduction q Individual placement presentation q Fast. Place, Capo, m. PL, Feng. Shui, APlace, NTUPlace, m. FAR, Kraftwerk&Domino, Dragon 2005 q Result Announcement q Conclusion & Future Work 11

Wire-Length Results adaptec 2 adaptec 4 bigblue 1 bigblue 2 bigblue 3 bigblue 4 Ratio APlace 87. 31 187. 65 94. 64 143. 82 357. 89 833. 21 1. 00 m. FAR 91. 53 190. 84 97. 70 168. 70 379. 95 876. 28 1. 06 dragon 94. 72 200. 88 102. 39 159. 71 380. 45 903. 96 1. 08 m. PL 97. 11 200. 94 98. 31 173. 22 369. 66 904. 19 1. 09 Fast. P 107. 86 204. 48 101. 56 169. 89 458. 49 889. 87 1. 16 Capo 99. 71 211. 25 108. 21 172. 30 382. 63 1098. 76 1. 17 NTUP 100. 31 206. 45 106. 54 190. 66 411. 81 1154. 15 1. 21 fs 50 122. 99 337. 22 114. 57 285. 43 471. 15 1040. 05 1. 50 K&D 157. 65 352. 01 149. 44 322. 22 656. 19 1403. 79 1. 84 12

Conclusions & Future Works q New placement benchmark suite ISPD 2005 q ISPD 2005 Placement Contest q Better quality metrics for future contest q Routability & congestion 13

adaptec 2 Layout Figures 14

adaptec 2 Layout Figures 15

adaptec 2 Layout Figures 16