arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2510.19260

Res-DPU: Resource-shared Digital Processing-in-memory Unit for Edge-AI Workloads

Mukul Lokhande·Narendra Singh Dhakad·Seema Chouhan·Akash Sankhe·Santosh Kumar Vishvakarma
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Processing-in-memory (PIM) has emerged as the go to solution for addressing the von Neumann bottleneck in edge AI accelerators. However, state-of-the-art (SoTA) digital PIM approaches suffer from low compute density, primarily due to the use of bulky bit cells and transistor-heavy adder trees, which impose limitations on macro scalability and energy efficiency. This work introduces Res-DPU, a resource-shared digital PIM unit, with a dual-port 5T SRAM latch and shared 2T AND compute logic. This reflects the per-bit multiplication cost to just 5.25T and reduced the transistor count of the PIM array by up to 56% over the SoTA works. Furthermore, a Transistor-Reduced 2D Interspersed Adder Tree (TRAIT) with FA-7T and PG-FA-26T helps reduce the power consumption of the adder tree by up to 21.35% and leads to improved energy efficiency by 59% compared to conventional 28T RCA designs. We propose a Cycle-controlled Iterative Approximate-Accurate Multiplication (CIA2M) approach, enabling run-time accuracy-latency trade-offs without requiring error-correction circuitry. The 16 KB REP-DPIM macro achieves 0.43 TOPS throughput and 87.22 TOPS/W energy efficiency in TSMC 65nm CMOS, with 96.85% QoR for ResNet-18 or VGG-16 on CIFAR-10, including 30% pruning. The proposed results establish a Res-DPU module for highly scalable and energy-efficient real-time edge AI accelerators.

Explore related subjects

cs.ARcs.ETeess.IV

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mukul Lokhande, Narendra Singh Dhakad, Seema Chouhan, Akash Sankhe, Santosh Kumar Vishvakarma. 2025-10-22. Res-DPU: Resource-shared Digital Processing-in-memory Unit for Edge-AI Workloads. https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.19260

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Implementation of an Adaptive Transformer Accelerator for Accurate Outdoor Localization with Massive MIMO

We present a sparsity-aware FPGA implementation of an adaptive Transformer-based localization accelerator for 5G massive MIMO targeting sub-10\,ms real-time positioning. The architecture exploits propagation characteristics, where beam-delay channel representations exhibit sparsity, enabling a row-wise skipping mechanism that removes low-energy beam components with minimal control overhead. Transformer computations are mapped onto a heterogeneous vector processing engine with parallel processing elements and adder trees, using mixed input- and output-stationary dataflow execution for efficient matrix computation and reduced data movement. Environment-dependent processing is supported through a lightweight runtime model-switching mechanism, where temporally filtered outputs of a single-layer perceptron router enable selection between specialized models with reduced latency. Implemented on a Xilinx Zynq UltraScale+ FPGA and evaluated on real-world massive MIMO measurements, the design achieves up to 65\% row sparsity, yielding peak computational speedups of approximately 2x while limiting the average localization accuracy degradation to below 10\%, relative to the fixed-point baseline model. The accelerator attains below 1.15\,m localization accuracy across scenarios, with inference latency of 0.51-2.11\,ms and throughput of up to 1961 positions/s. These results demonstrate that propagation-aware sparsity, mixed dataflow execution, and efficient runtime model switching enable a scalable and low-latency hardware realization of adaptive Transformer-based localization for real-time 5G systems.

cs.AR↗
arXiv2026

RTLScout: Joint Agentic Code and Synthesis Optimization for Efficient Digital Circuits

We present RTLScout, an autonomous system that combines LLM-driven agentic design with logic synthesis optimization and arithmetic architecture selection. An LLM agent iteratively writes, evaluates, and refines RTL designs, guided by delay and area feedback from Yosys and OpenROAD. The agent writes Spire, a Python-embedded HDL we introduce, in which optimization intent is expressed locally in the source, selecting logic-synthesis or arithmetic-architecture optimizations per subcircuit. The four-phase pipeline relies entirely on open-source EDA tools and an open-weights LLM. On an IEEE-754-compliant 16-bit floating-point multiplier with subnormal support, RTLScout reduces area by 34% and delay by 38% relative to a starting design and outperforms a commercial-tool reference design on the ASAP7 technology. We show that agentic RTL rewriting and synthesis optimization are complementary, with neither alone reaching the result of the full pipeline. On 14 RTLRewriter benchmarks, the Spire-based pipeline achieves 16.3% lower mean per-case Yosys cell count than an otherwise identical Verilog pipeline.

cs.AR↗
arXiv2026

HBF Sucks? A Full-Stack Characterization of High-Bandwidth Flash for KV-Centric LLM Serving

A faster storage device should make serving faster. We find the opposite. High-Bandwidth Flash (HBF) stacks NAND behind a wide, package-local interface, promising flash-scale capacity with far lower read latency and higher bandwidth than an SSD. The obvious move is to keep an SSD-style Mooncake KV-offloading stack and swap in HBF underneath. We built that system and measured it: an extended TokenSim, four complete two-hour Qwen-Bailian production traces, five dense and mixture-of-experts models, and H100/B200 profiles. The upgrade backfires. Average end-to-end latency rises 2--5.5$\times$ and maximum SLO goodput falls 1.1--2.7$\times$ across H100 and B200, so the faster device yields a slower system. A cost-benefit model explains the paradox: a faster far tier pays off only when read I/O is the bottleneck, reads outweigh writes, and delivered bandwidth is sustainable. Transient KV violates all three at once. Buying flash through the package costs GPU near-tier capacity and bandwidth, while HBF's own read/write latency barely matters: scaling it 3.75$\times$ moves latency less than 1\%. Worse, the two-tier hierarchy keeps reuse in the near tier and hands HBF a relentless write-heavy stream. Writes outnumber reads on every trace, so a 3D-ICE model shows the stack hits its thermal limit well below peak bandwidth, and a TLC tier wears out sooner than the SSD pool it replaced. The device is fine; the drop-in deployment is not. HBF sucks as an SSD replacement for transient KV, but earns its place in LLM serving when used selectively with reuse-aware placement, write budgeting, and thermal coordination.

cs.AR↗