Paper detail

BEEBS: Open Benchmarks for Energy Measurements on Embedded Platforms

This paper presents and justifies an open benchmark suite named BEEBS, targeted at evaluating the energy consumption of embedded processors. We explore the possible sources of energy consumption, then select individual benchmarks from contemporary suites to cover these areas. Version one of BEEBS is presented here and contains 10 benchmarks that cover a wide range of typical embedded applications. The benchmark suite is portable across diverse architectures and is freely available. The benchmark suite is extensively evaluated, and the properties of its constituent programs are analysed. Using real hardware platforms we show case examples which illustrate the difference in power dissipation between three processor architectures and their related ISAs. We observe significant differences in the average instruction dissipation between the architectures of 4.4x, specifically 170uW/MHz (ARM Cortex-M0), 65uW/MHz (Adapteva Epiphany) and 88uW/MHz (XMOS XS1-L1).

preprint2013arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.