96

Raspberry Pi Pico 2 at 873.5MHz with 3.05V Core Abuse

Great stuff.

It wouldn't be surprising if the RP2350 gets officially certified to run at something above the max supported clock at launch (150MHz), though obviously nothing close to 800MHz. That happened to the RP2040[1], which at launch nominally supported 133MHz but now it's up to 200MHz (the SDK still defaults to 125MHz for compatibility, but getting 200MHz is as simple as toggling a config flag[2]).

[1] https://www.tomshardware.com/raspberry-pi/the-raspberry-pi-p...

[2] https://github.com/raspberrypi/pico-sdk/releases/tag/2.1.1

5 hours agomoefh

The 300MHz, 400MHz, and 500MHz points requiring only 1.1, 1.3, and 1.5v and with only the last point getting slightly above body temperature, even with no cooling, seem like something that should maybe not be "officially" supported, but maybe mentioned somewhere in an official blog post or docs. Getting 3x+ the performance with some config changes is noteworthy. It would be interesting to run an experiment to see if there's any measurable degradation of stability or increased likelihood at failure at those settings compared to a stock unit running the same workload for the same time.

33 minutes agohnuser123456

When pushing clock speeds, things get nondeterministic...

Here is an idea for a CPU designer...

Observe that you can get way more performance (increased clock speed) or more performance per watt (lower core voltage) if you are happy to lose reliability.

Also observe that many CPU's do superscalar out of order execution, which requires having the ability to backtrack, and this is normally implemented with a queue and a 'commit' phase.

Finally, observe that verifying this commit queue is a fully parallel operation, and therefore can be checked slower and in a more power efficient way.

So, here's the idea. You run a blazing fast superscalar CPU, well past the safe clock speed limits that makes hundreds of computation or flow control mistakes per second. You have slow but parallel verification circuitry to verify the execution trace. Whenever a mistake is made, you put a pipeline bubble in the main CPU, clear the commit queue, you put in the correct result from the verification system, and continue - just like you would with a branch misprediction.

This happening a few hundred times per second will have a negligible impact on performance. (consider 100 cycles 'reset' penalty, 100*100 is a tiny fraction of 4Ghz)

The main fast CPU could also make deliberate mistakes - for example assuming floats aren't NaN, assuming division won't be by zero, etc. Trimming off rarely used logic makes the core smaller, making it easier to make it even faster or more power efficient (since wire length determines power consumption per bit).

4 hours agolondons_explore

How do we know if a computation is a mistake? Do we verify every computation?

If so, then:

That seems like it would slow the ultimate computation to no more than rate rate at which they can be these computations can be verified.

That makes the verifier the ultimate bottleneck, and the other (fast, expensive -- like an NHRA drag car) pipeline becomes vestigial since it can't be trusted anyway.

25 minutes agossl-3

You could run an LLM like this, and the temperature parameter would become an actual thing...

3 hours agogruturo
[deleted]
2 hours ago

Side channel attacks don't stand a chance!

42 minutes agohnuser123456

> if you are happy to lose reliability.

The only problem here is that reliability is a statistical thing. You might be lucky, you might not.

3 hours agohulitu

It’s amusing to contemplate energy per cycle as one clocks higher and higher — the usual formula has the energy per cycle scaling roughly as voltage squared.

I recently turned turbo off on a small, lightly loaded Intel server. This reduced power by about a factor of 2, core temperature by 30-40C, and allowed running the fans much quieter. I’m baffled as to why the CPU didn’t do this on its own. (Apple gets these details right. Intel, not so much.)

2 hours agoamluto

Both the RP2040 and the RP2350 are amazing value these days with most other electronics increasing in price. Plus you can run FUZIX on them for the UNIX feel.

5 hours agoTepix

Mmh... I think that the LicheeRV Nano has kind of more value to it.

Around 20 bucks for the Wifi variant. 1GHz, 256MB RAM, USB OTG, GPIO and full Linux support while drawing less than 1W without any power optimizations and even supports < 15$ 2.8" LCDs out of the box.

And Rust can be compiled to be used with it...

https://github.com/scpcom/LicheeSG-Nano-Build/

Take a look at the `best-practise.md`.

It is also the base board of NanoKVM[1]

1: https://github.com/sipeed/NanoKVM

4 hours agosandreas

I think the ace up the sleeve is PIO; I've seen so many weird and wonderful use cases for the Pico/RP-chips enabled by this feature, that don't seem replicable on other $1-class microcontrollers.

3 hours agogeerlingguy

I'd rather have the Linux SOC and a $0.50-$1 FPGA (Renesas ForgeFPGA, Gowin, Efinix, whatever) nearby.

an hour ago15155

Wow thanks, this is definetely something I have to investigate. Maybe the Sipeed Maix SDK provides something similar for the LicheeRV Nano.

I'm currently prototyping a tiny portable audio player[1] which battery life could benefit a lot from this.

1: https://github.com/sandreas/rust-slint-riscv64-musl-demo

3 hours agosandreas

Amazing value indeed!

That said: it's a bit sad there's so little (if anything) in the space between microcontrollers & feature-packed Linux capable SoC's.

I mean: these days a multi-core, 64 bit CPU & a few GB's of RAM seems to be the absolute minimum for smartphones, tablets etc, let alone desktop style work. But remember ~y2k masses of people were using single core, sub-1GHz CPU's with a few hundred MB RAM or less. And running full-featured GUI's, Quake1/2/3 & co, web surfing etc etc on that. GUI's have been done on sub-1MB RAM machines once.

Microcontrollers otoh seem to top out on ~512KB RAM. I for one would love a part with integrated: # Multi-core, but 32 bit CPU. 8+ cores cost 'nothing' in this context. # Say, 8 MB+ RAM (up to a couple hundred MB) # Simple 2D graphics, maybe a blitter, some sound hw etc # A few options for display output. Like, DisplayPort & VGA.

Read: relative low-complexity, but with the speed & power efficient integration of modern IC's. The RP2350pc goes in this direction, but just isn't (quite) there.

2 hours agoRetroTechie

it might actually be better to cool from the bottom, since the pads probably conduct heat better than the chip package material

I bet if you designed a custom board it could do a little better

4 hours agoPalomides

Haha — this was a fun day! It's honestly surprising how robust the RP2350 was under such extreme experimentation. Mike's write-up walks through pushing the core voltages far beyond stock limits and dry-ice cooling to see what the silicon could handle.

Credit where it's due: Mike is a wizard. He's been involved in some of our more adventurous tinkering, and his input on the more complex areas of our product software has been invaluable. Check out his GitHub for some really interesting projects: https://github.com/MichaelBell

Blatant plug: We have a wide range of boards based on the RP2350 for all sorts of projects! https://shop.pimoroni.com/collections/pico :-)

6 hours agowhiskers

This some harmless stupid fun.

7 hours agocrest

Interesting post. Curious what can I run on a RPi Pico 2 W since I recently got my hands on it.

4 hours ago8cvor6j844qw_d6

Well, hope no one tries to deploy overlocked Raspberry Pi hardware in production... especially for kiosk style applications where they're in a metal box in the sun.

They're unstable enough at stock if taken outside an air conditioned room.

5 hours agonottorp

The post is about a microcontroller that sips a fraction of a Watt under sane conditions. Cooling its CPU cores is not a problem for real-world applications. You have to bypass the internal voltage regulator crank up the voltage even more before heat becomes an issue.

2 hours agocrest

This is about the Raspberry Pi Pico 2 (based on the RP2350), not the original Raspberry Pi.

4 hours agowhiskers

And is it better with bad cooling?

4 hours agonottorp

It's better with absolutely no cooling. It doesn't even consume (and thus dissipate) 100mW flat-out.

3 hours agoaaronmdjones

Yes.