GAP
Graphical Asymmetric Processing
SBIR/Final Presentation
CS410, Group 2
May 3rd, 2004
Project Team Members
Roberta Serbanescu
Project Manager
Thomas James
Project Lead
3 May 2004
Mohammed Iraqi
Technical/Research
Bruck Woldie
Scheduling/Finance
Michael Olijnyk
Marketing
2
Problem - Inefficiency
Universities and Businesses are:
– Being inefficient with time
– Being inefficient with money
Every time they buy a computer
3 May 2004
3
Solution- The Graphics Processor
Why?
– Computers have a GPU
– GPUs are processors, like a CPU
– GPUs are not being used by
businesses, even in the most stressful
tasks.
3 May 2004
4
Utilize it!
A product can be created that will stop
this problem
Use the unused GPU
 Improve Return On Investment time
 Improve throughput
NO extra hardware.
3 May 2004
5
Description
Utilizing existing hardware:
– Improve computing power
– Improve computing time
– Improve computing responsiveness
By creating a:
– Programmer API to use the GPU
– Selling that API to software developers
3 May 2004
6
Project Goals
Increase computer performance
– Leverage the GPU (no extra cost)
– Keep compatibility with current
software
– Solution should be cross platform
3 May 2004
7
Computer Internals:
CPU
GPU
3 May 2004
8
The Computer Highway

Data flows to and from
the CPU much like cars
on a highway; when there
is too much information;
there is a traffic jam
which slows down
everyone.
3 May 2004
9
GPU: 200 GigaFLOPS Theoretical (GeForceFX)
CPU: 170 GigaFlops Theoretical (PowerPC G5)
Before:
After:
Usage: 75% CPU efficiency, no GPU
Usage: CPU @ 60%, GPU @ 30%
CPU=~128 GigaFLOPS
CPU=~102 GigaFLOPS
GPU=>1 GigaFLOPS
GPU=~51 GigaFLOPS
= ~128 GigaFlops
= ~153 GigaFLOPS (20% Gain)
3 May 2004
10
Source: SPEC & Shark
Supporters

ATI and nVidia, two major video card
manufacturers, both provide the
technology to do this – and on
multiple platforms.
3 May 2004
11
Market Share for Standalone
GPUs
Market Share
3%
3%
NVIDIA
ATI
40%
54%
SiS
Matrox Graphics
Mercury Research Details 2003 Graphics Market
3 May 2004
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/display/20031029073519.html 12
Supporters:
Dr. Varadarajan, head of VA Tech’s
super computer, was asked about the
ability to leverage these processors
and agreed it was feasible and
desirable.
3 May 2004
13
GPU’s Raw Performance
Performance growth has multiplied
at a rate of 2.8 times per year since
1993
 Analysts expect this pace to maintain
for another 5 years
 GPU performance will move into the
teraflop range by 2005

3 May 2004
http://www.computer.org/computer/homepage/1003/entertainment
14
Previous Research

Discussed since 1996, but never
implemented.
 Main research issues include quality of
floating point
– The numbers are ‘single precision’ not double.

Works best when ‘batched,’ which
requires a relatively ‘parallel’ system
– Already a multithreading issue. Solutions both
in programmer practice and compiler design
exist.
3 May 2004
15
Similar Technologies
The PowerPC/Macintosh AltiVec
processor, AKA Velocity Engine
 The Pentium3/Pentium4’s SSE/SSE2
instructions, AKA NetBurst
 3dFX’s revolution with the Voodoo
and Glide in 3d graphics in the mid90s.

3 May 2004
16
The Computer Highway (Cont)

Our solution gives some
of the data another path;
that to the graphics card.
Functionally it will act
very much like an HOV
lane to being processed.
3 May 2004
17
Procedures

“Extreme Programming”
Programming
– Eight years old, proven
– Strengths:
• Communication, Simplicity, Feedback,
Courage
– Ideal for dynamic systems and
experimental projects
FOR MORE INFO...
3 May 2004
http://www.extremeprogramming.org/
18
Management Plan
Management Plan
Marketing Plan
Print Ads
Scheduling Plan
Finance Plan
Evaluation Plan
SBIR
Demos
XP
3 May 2004
19
The Market

API implementation sold to
developers who use the technology
to write their programs.
– over 585,000 people are professional
developers; making the 51st most
populous job in the nation (eighth
highest among ‘skilled’ labor) according
to the Department of Labor. More are in
universities and overseas.
3 May 2004
20
The Market (cont)
Would require a recompile of existing
software; and to be optimal probably
code modifications (particularly for
single-threaded applications).
 Case-in-points of new APIs:
Intel SSE/SSE2, 3dFX Glide,
Microsoft .NET

3 May 2004
21
PC Sales (Millions of Units)
3 May 2004
http://www.etforecasts.com/products/ES_pcww1203.htm
22
PCs in Use
PCs-In-Use (Millions)
Worldwide
1995
2000
2001
2007
229
530
603
1,150
Share In Homes (%)
35.2
43.5
45.1
52.3
USA
93.5
162
175
251
Share In Homes (%)
36.9
49
50.4
54.6
Western Europe
62.4
139
158
285
Share In Homes (%)
39.2
48.5
49.9
52.9
Asia-Pacific
43.6
139
166
367
Share In Homes (%)
29.3
35.8
38.3
53.9
3 May 2004
Computer Industry Almanac : http://www.c-i-a.com/pr0302.htm
23
Server CPUs Have Just Enough
Power
3 May 2004
http://www.adaptec.com/worldwide/product/markeditorial.html
24
Customer Characteristics
Employs programmers involved in
full scale development
 Uses applications requiring large
amounts of computing power
 Has need to analyze data quickly

3 May 2004
25
Businesses Identified
Consumer goods industries
 Retailers
 Financial services industry

3 May 2004
26
BI Regulates a Company's Operations


BI is no longer a luxury – it is essential
Decisions are made at lower and lower levels in
organizations:
• Everyone is an analyst at some point in the
day
• Front-line workers are increasingly
responsible for making large decisions
• They must have access to the results of BI to
make appropriate decisions
3 May 2004
27
OLAP Products Criteria
Performance
– Calculation times
– Load times
Multi-user
write-back
What-if capabilities
Ease of deployment
Sophisticated modeling
Fully integrated, enterprise-wide workflow
& collaboration
3 May 2004
www.opalreport.com/Applications.htm
28
OLAP Market
3 May 2004
The OLAP Report:Market Share Analysis: http://www.olapreport.com/Market.htm#shares
29
Worldwide Analytic Apps SW
Market
Over $4.8 billion in 2007
 CRM analytics 12.9%
 Financial analytics 10.3%
 Operations analytics 7.4%

3 May 2004
30
A Few Statistics

IDC studied analytic applications and their
impact on core business processes:
 What was the ROI for business analytics?
– 46% of organizations generated ROI <
100%
– 34% generated ROI between 101% and
1,000%
– 20% generated ROI > 1,000%
3 May 2004
“The Financial Impact of Business Analytics,”
www.idc.com/analyticsroi/
31
Data Mining Market

Research firm IDC expects 13%
compound annual growth rate through
2006
3 May 2004
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,646111,00.asp
32
Case Study – The World Bank
IT’s mission – fight poverty with passion &
professionalism
 Goal: to perform quick, insightful analyses
on many economic indicators from a
hundred countries
 How - BI environment that
– Allows users to perform complex
calculations in seconds in a context and
format relevant to individual users
– Provides trustworthy economic data
analyzed on the fly

3 May 2004
www.hpcwire.com/dsstar/00/1003/102243.html
33
Case Study – The World Bank

Results.
• Economists have analytical, collaborative
capabilities contributing to improved oversight
- making governments more accountable.
• Great variety of skills in users satisfied –
heads of state, finance ministers, chief
economists, educators, etc.
3 May 2004
34
Results from the World Bank

They gained:
– Increased business performance
– Reduced operation wastes
– Improved customer relations
3 May 2004
35
Competition Matrix
Name
Costs
Gain
G.A.P.
$500/yr
Development
23%
Additional
Computers
~$1000-$3000 a (n+1)/n where n
piece
is # of comps
Super
Computers
3 May 2004
~$100,000-$23
million+
Indefinite (Task
specific)
36
Competitive Analysis

Competitor:
– Cheaper new computers

Our Strengths against them:
– Extendable to current and future machines
(combinable)
– No extra logistics requirements (power,
cooling, etc)

Our Weaknesses against them:
– New and untested use of technology
– Method of integration not as clear cut to a
manager.
3 May 2004
Virginia Tech Terrascale Cost Comparison
37
Competitive Analysis, Cont.

Competitors
– Custom super-computers (i.e. Cray)

Our Strengths Against Them:
– Cheaper
– No Vendor lock-in

Our Weaknesses Against Them:
– Less support
– No reputation
3 May 2004
Virginia Tech Terrascale Cost Comparison
38
Selling Method
Sell to Software Developers
 Unit Price estimation: $500/per
license/per year
 Estimated Market: Over 350
companies (20% of ‘high end’
computing software developers)

3 May 2004
39
Versatility in Sales

Microsoft, Apple, Sun
– Sellable after “Proof of Concept” stage
for fast turn around and no need for
specialist programmers or long term
investment

Individual License
– Sellable later to programmers and/or
users for possibility of greater profit
margins
3 May 2004
40
Phase 0
3 May 2004
Length
71 days
Total
None
41
Phase 1
3 May 2004
42
Staffing Plan – Phase 1
Manager
 4 Programmers
 Technical Documenter
 Web Developer

3 May 2004
43
Phase 1 Budget
Length
88 days
Staffing
69,500 (4 programmers, technical
documenter, web development)
27,800
40%
Overhead
NonStaff
Total
3 May 2004
$2,000
$99,300
44
Phase 2
3 May 2004
45
Staffing Plan – Phase 2
Manager
 4 Programmers
 Marketing

3 May 2004
46
Phase 2 Budget
3 May 2004
Length:
90 days
Staffing
$139000 (4 programmers, marketing)
40%
overhead
NonStaff
(incl ads)
$55600
Total
$224,600
$30,000
47
Phase 2 Scheduling

A “Proof of Concept” could be done
within a month given programmers
who know Assembly and HLSL (High
Level Shader Language).
Refinements can continue while
handing off more complicated (and
thus costly) programming needs to
card manufacturers.
3 May 2004
48
Phase 2 Scheduling

Cost could be reduced for GAP by
chipset makers supporting it through
drivers, much like they today support
OpenGL and Direct3d.
– nVidia, the largest video card
manufacturer, has more software
engineers than hardware engineers.
3 May 2004
49
Phase 3
3 May 2004
50
Staffing Plan – Phase 3
Manager
 Programmer
 Marketing

3 May 2004
51
Phase 3 Budget
3 May 2004
Length
Indefinite
Staffing:
$65,000/year (1 programmer)
40%
overhead
NonStaff:
$26,000/year
Total
$121,000/year
$30,000/year
52
Phase Deliverables

Phase 0

– Concept
– Feasibility
– Milestones
Identified
– SBIR I Proposal

Phase 2
– Product Sales
– Driver Model
3 May 2004
Phase 1
–
–
–
–

Prototype
Documentation
Web Site
SBIR II Proposal
Phase 3
– Product to market
– Refine Performance
53
Reasons economic and scientific

Tools sold to developers have price
tags from $500-$50,000 and include
performance optimizers.
– Case in Point: Maya Unlimited is $7000
USD at this date.

With the growing power of GPUs, it
would be a missed opportunity to not
leverage them.
3 May 2004
54
Conclusion

There is a need for increased computing
power
 Our product provides the ability for
software developers to utilize more power
with their customer using the same
hardware
 Our solution is relatively “fast and cheap”
to create
 It can be leveraged across a computers of
any size: huge clusters to home users.
3 May 2004
55