Abstract

With the emergence of on-chip networks, the power consumed by router buffers has become a primary concern. Bufferless flow control addresses this issue by removing router buffers, and handles contention by dropping or deflecting flits. This work compares virtual-channel (buffered) and deflection (packet-switched bufferless) flow control. Our evaluation includes optimizations for both schemes: buffered networks use custom SRAM-based buffers and empty buffer bypassing for energy efficiency, while bufferless networks feature a novel routing scheme that reduces average latency by 5%. Results show that unless process constraints lead to excessively costly buffers, the performance, cost and increased complexity of deflection flow control outweigh its potential gains: bufferless designs are only marginally (up to 1.5%) more energy efficient at very light loads, and buffered networks provide lower latency and higher throughput per unit power under most conditions.