Rapid adoption of machine learning (ML) technologies has led to a surge in power consumption across diverse systems, from tiny IoT devices to massive datacenter clusters. Benchmarking the energy efficiency of these systems is crucial for optimization, but presents novel challenges due to the variety of hardware platforms, workload characteristics, and system-level interactions. This paper introduces MLPerf® Power, a comprehensive benchmarking methodology with capabilities to evaluate the energy efficiency of ML systems at power levels ranging from microwatts to megawatts. Developed by a consortium of industry professionals from more than 20 organizations, coupled with insights from academia, MLPerf Power establishes rules and best practices to ensure comparability across diverse architectures. We use representative workloads from the MLPerf benchmark suite to collect $\mathbf{1, 8 4 1}$ reproducible measurements from 60 systems across the entire range of ML deployment scales. Our analysis reveals trade-offs between performance, complexity, and energy efficiency across this wide range of systems, providing actionable insights for designing optimized ML solutions from the smallest edge devices to the largest cloud infrastructures. This work emphasizes the importance of energy efficiency as a key metric in the evaluation and comparison of the ML system, laying the foundation for future research in this critical area. We discuss the implications for developing sustainable AI solutions and standardizing energy efficiency benchmarking for ML systems.

Efficient HPC libraries often expose multiple tunable parameters, algorithmic implementations, or a combination of them, to provide optimized routines. The optimal parameters and algorithmic choices may depend on input properties such as the shapes of the matrices involved in the operation. Traditionally, these parameters are manually tuned or set by auto-tuners. In emerging applications such as deep learning, this approach is not effective across the wide range of inputs and architectures used in practice. In this work, we analyze different machine learning techniques and predictive models to accelerate the convolution operator and GEMM. Moreover, we address the problem of dataset generation, and we study the performance, accuracy, and generalization ability of the models. Our insights allow us to improve the performance of computationally expensive deep learning primitives on high-end GPUs as well as low-power embedded GPU architectures on three different libraries. Experimental results show significant improvement in the target applications from 50% up to 300% compared to auto-tuned and high-optimized vendor-based heuristics by using simple decision tree- and MLP-based models.

Machine-learning (ML) hardware and software system demand is burgeoning. Driven by ML applications, the number of different ML inference systems has exploded. Over 100 organizations are building ML inference chips, and the systems that incorporate existing models span at least three orders of magnitude in power consumption and five orders of magnitude in performance; they range from embedded devices to data-center solutions. Fueling the hardware are a dozen or more software frameworks and libraries. The myriad combinations of ML hardware and ML software make assessing ML-system performance in an architecture-neutral, representative, and reproducible manner challenging. There is a clear need for industry-wide standard ML benchmarking and evaluation criteria. MLPerf Inference answers that call. In this paper, we present our benchmarking method for evaluating ML inference systems. Driven by more than 30 organizations as well as more than 200 ML engineers and practitioners, MLPerf prescribes a set of rules and best practices to ensure comparability across systems with wildly differing architectures. The first call for submissions garnered more than 600 reproducible inference-performance measurements from 14 organizations, representing over 30 systems that showcase a wide range of capabilities. The submissions attest to the benchmark’s flexibility and adaptability.

Programming accelerators such as GPUs with low-level APIs and languages such as OpenCL and CUDA is difficult, error-prone, and not performance-portable. Automatic parallelization and domain specific languages (DSLs) have been proposed to hide complexity and regain performance portability. We present PENCIL, a rigorously-defined subset of GNU C99-enriched with additional language constructs-that enables compilers to exploit parallelism and produce highly optimized code when targeting accelerators. PENCIL aims to serve both as a portable implementation language for libraries, and as a target language for DSL compilers. We implemented a PENCIL-to-OpenCL backend using a state-of-the-art polyhedral compiler. The polyhedral compiler, extended to handle data-dependent control flow and non-affine array accesses, generates optimized OpenCL code. To demonstrate the potential and performance portability of PENCIL and the PENCIL-to-OpenCL compiler, we consider a number of image processing kernels, a set of benchmarks from the Rodinia and SHOC suites, and DSL embedding scenarios for linear algebra (BLAS) and signal processing radar applications (SpearDE), and present experimental results for four GPU platforms: AMD Radeon HD 5670 and R9 285, NVIDIA GTX 470, and ARM Mali-T604.

We present VOBLA, a domain-specific language designed for programming linear algebra libraries. VOBLA is compiled to PENCIL, a domain independent intermediate language designed for efficient mapping to accelerator architectures such as GPGPUs. PENCIL is compiled to efficient, platform-specific OpenCL code using techniques based on the polyhedral model. This approach addresses both the programmer productivity and performance portability concerns associated with accelerator programming.

We have developed a bit-reversal algorithm (BRAVO) using vector permute operations, which is optimal in the number of permutations, and its cache-optimal version (COBRAVO). Our implementation on PowerMac G5 shows 2-4.5 fold improvement for small data sets and 15-75% improvement for large data sets (depending on the data element size) over the best known approach (COBRA).