- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

I am trying to measure the latency of an operation by using rdtsc().

The problem I am facing is that the latency of that operation or number of cycles taken by that operation remains the same even when I change the frequency of the processor core from 3 Ghz to 2 Ghz. In other words there is no effect on output of rdtsc when I change the frequency

Can anyone please tell me why this is happening.

Thank You.

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

Please see chapter 16.11 from Intel SDM vol 3A.Fora range of Intel CPU (please see in the document)and moving forward the TSC increments at a constant rate (there are two wayshow to set that rate). Therefore your results are the expected ones since the TSC will be incremented ata constant rate.

Anyway please note that rdtsc() is not serializing or ordered with other instructions. Tthereforeyou might end up measuringless or more that what you really want. You could try rdtscp() which is a serializing instruction.

Link Copied

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

When you measurethe latency in cycles, as you do when using RDTSC, it must remain the same. To convert the result into seconds you need to divide the cycles through the clock frequency.

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

Actally I am trying to measure the latency of a DVFS switch. I check the rdtsc() before and after changing the frequency and subtract those 2 values to get the number of cycles. The problem is, the number of cycles do not change. I mean the rdtsc() is fixed for 3Ghz and does not change with frequency. I am not able to understand why this is happening.

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

You should at least check the granularity you are seeing for rdtsc by writing a tight loop which does rdtsc repeatedly and finds the smallest time interval by which it changes reliably. According to the tests in the classic Livermore Fortran Kernel, the granularity is nearly 10^-7 sec (100 nsec) on most IA CPUs.

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

Please see chapter 16.11 from Intel SDM vol 3A.Fora range of Intel CPU (please see in the document)and moving forward the TSC increments at a constant rate (there are two wayshow to set that rate). Therefore your results are the expected ones since the TSC will be incremented ata constant rate.

Anyway please note that rdtsc() is not serializing or ordered with other instructions. Tthereforeyou might end up measuringless or more that what you really want. You could try rdtscp() which is a serializing instruction.

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

While reading that section, I came across section 16.11.1 which is about "Invariant TSC" in newer processors. How is this different from "Constant TSC" as per section 16.11 ?

Thanks...

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content

invariant TSC (availablefrom Nehalem onwards) will count at aconstant rate no matter what state (P, C or T) is the CPU in.

Previous processors, while incrementing at a constant rate as well,will stop counting while in deep sleep states (for example C6 state).

I hope is clearer now.

- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page