This document is for Coventry University students for their own use in completing their assessed work for this module and should not be passed to third parties or posted on any website. Any infringements of this rule should be reported to [email protected] Faculty of Engineering, Environment and Computing M09CDE Computer Architectures and Principles Assignment Brief 2018/19 Module Title: Computer Architectures and Principles Individual Cohort (January) Module Code M09CDE Coursework Title Resit Coursework Hand out date: 21/01/2019 Lecturer Dr Dianabasi Nkantah Due date: 6pm 29th April 2019 Estimated Time (hrs): 30 hours Word Limit*: 3500 Coursework type: Assignment % of Module Mark 50% Submission arrangement online via CUMoodle: Submission link on CUMoodle File types and method of recording: ‘.pdf’, ‘.docx’, ‘.doc’ Mark and Feedback date: 13th Mar 2019 Mark and Feedback method: Feedback file on CUMoodle Module Learning Outcomes Assessed: 2. Evaluate alternative systems software and machine performance features in order to select appropriate tools and deploy suitable hardware elements for a given set of technical and operational requirements. 3. Discuss the benefits of a range of system architectures and communications infrastructure elements for a range of applications and user requirements bearing in mind the competing constraints of performance, cost, security and usability. 4. Identify the merits of a range of specialised architectures in providing performance and other critical requirements for particular application areas or environments, measuring their effectiveness in achieving these goals. Task and Mark distribution: SECTION A You are required to choose two currently used microprocessors (from two different manufacturers). Processor manufacturers include Intel, AMD, ARM, Motorola, Fujitsu, VIA Technologies, etc. Each of the two processors chosen should be suitable for use in a different class of computers (e.g. PCs/Laptops, Servers, and embedded systems) from the second processor. Conduct research with the aim of analysing, as well as comparing and contrasting the design of these processors. A report of this analysis and comparison/contrast, with recommendations, should be compiled and submitted. You are expected to conduct research external to lectures (e.g. finding evidence to support your claims from manufacturer websites, journal/conference articles, etc.). Research should focus on performance, cost and energy consumption of these microprocessors. Aspects of design to consider should include, but not limited to, instruction set architecture, internal structure, interconnection architecture, cache organisation, error correction, memory management and parallel processing. Your report should also provide an indication of the current trend in processor design. This document is for Coventry University students for their own use in completing the.

1. This document is for Coventry University students for their own
use in completing their
assessed work for this module and should not be passed to third
parties or posted on any
website. Any infringements of this rule should be reported to
[email protected]
Faculty of Engineering, Environment and Computing
M09CDE Computer Architectures and
Principles
Assignment Brief 2018/19
Module Title: Computer Architectures
and Principles
Individual Cohort (January) Module Code
M09CDE
Coursework Title
Resit Coursework
Hand out date:
21/01/2019
Lecturer
Dr Dianabasi Nkantah

2. Due date: 6pm 29th April
2019
Estimated Time (hrs): 30 hours
Word Limit*: 3500
Coursework type: Assignment % of Module Mark
50%
Submission arrangement online via CUMoodle: Submission link
on CUMoodle
File types and method of recording: ‘.pdf’, ‘.docx’, ‘.doc’
Mark and Feedback date: 13th Mar 2019
Mark and Feedback method: Feedback file on CUMoodle
Module Learning Outcomes Assessed:
2. Evaluate alternative systems software and machine
performance features in order to select
appropriate tools and deploy suitable hardware elements for a
given set of technical and
operational requirements.
3. Discuss the benefits of a range of system architectures and
communications infrastructure
elements for a range of applications and user requirements
bearing in mind the competing
constraints of performance, cost, security and usability.

3. 4. Identify the merits of a range of specialised architectures in
providing performance and other
critical requirements for particular application areas or
environments, measuring their
effectiveness in achieving these goals.
Task and Mark distribution:
SECTION A
You are required to choose two currently used microprocessors
(from two different manufacturers).
Processor manufacturers include Intel, AMD, ARM, Motorola,
Fujitsu, VIA Technologies, etc. Each of the
two processors chosen should be suitable for use in a different
class of computers (e.g. PCs/Laptops,
Servers, and embedded systems) from the second processor.
Conduct research with the aim of analysing,
as well as comparing and contrasting the design of these
processors. A report of this analysis and
comparison/contrast, with recommendations, should be
compiled and submitted. You are expected to
conduct research external to lectures (e.g. finding evidence to
support your claims from manufacturer
websites, journal/conference articles, etc.).
Research should focus on performance, cost and energy
consumption of these microprocessors.
Aspects of design to consider should include, but not limited to,
instruction set architecture, internal
structure, interconnection architecture, cache organisation, error
correction, memory management and
parallel processing. Your report should also provide an
indication of the current trend in processor design.
This document is for Coventry University students for their own

4. use in completing their
assessed work for this module and should not be passed to third
parties or posted on any
website. Any infringements of this rule should be reported to
[email protected]
An instruction set should be chosen from those used for any of
the two microprocessors. An assembly
language based on the chosen instruction set should be used in
implementing an algorithm (you should
agree on the algorithm to implement with the module leader).
The algorithm should include a loop, a
branch instruction, a subroutine call and some arithmetic/logic
operations.
SECTION B
Parallel computing can be provided by multicore (chip
multiprocessor) or multiprocessor systems. With
the latter, the multiple processors can be in distinct machines
and operate either as one distributed
system - symmetric multiprocessor (SMP), using a shared main
memory, or non-shared memory systems
where the workload of multiple processes/tasks is distributed
around a cluster of machines, but the tasks
themselves are distinct. Machines can also operate using a
shared memory but with a cache-coherent
Non-Uniform Memory Access (CC-NUMA) approach.
Conduct research on SMP, Cluster and CC-NUMA systems. As
part of this work, distinguish between
thread and process level distribution.
Provide examples of applications for which these systems would
be best suited. Examples of commercial
systems that adopt these approaches should be included in the
report. Details of the architecture and
organisation of these systems and their design issues should
also be included in the report.

5. Your report should be suitable for use as a detailed information
document to provide an awareness of
the differences among the approaches, and the strengths and
weaknesses of each approach.
Assignment Deliverables
report should include:
o Section A (not more than 2000 word) [40 marks]
o Section B (not more than 1500 words) [30 marks]
o An assembly language code for the implementation of an
algorithm [20 marks]
t Presentation will be assessed
[10 marks]
Notes:
1. You are expected to use the CUHarvard referencing format.
For support and advice on how this
students can contact Centre for Academic Writing (CAW).
2. Please notify your registry course support team and module
leader for disability support.
https://curve.coventry.ac.uk/open/file/bdfb947c-9d43-48d3-
8ec8-
f511682e1dd1/1/The%20CU%20Guide%20to%20Referencing%2
0in%20Harvard%20Style.pdf
http://www.coventry.ac.uk/study-at-coventry/student-

6. support/academic-support/centre-for-academic-
writing/?theme=main
This document is for Coventry University students for their own
use in completing their
assessed work for this module and should not be passed to third
parties or posted on any
website. Any infringements of this rule should be reported to
[email protected]
3. Any student requiring an extension or deferral should follow
the university process as outlined
here.
4. The University cannot take responsibility for any coursework
lost or corrupted on disks, laptops
or personal computer. Students should therefore regularly back-
up any work and are advised to
save it on the University system.
5. If there are technical or performance issues that prevent
students submitting coursework
through the online coursework submission system on the day of
a coursework deadline, an
appropriate extension to the coursework submission deadline
will be agreed. This extension
will normally be 24 hours or the next working day if the
deadline falls on a Friday or over the
weekend period. This will be communicated via email and as a

7. CUMoodle announcement.
6. Assignments that are more than 10% over the word limit will
result in a deduction of 10% of
the mark i.e. a mark of 60% will lead to a reduction of 6% to
54%. The word limit includes
quotations, but excludes the bibliography, reference list and
tables.
Mark allocation guidelines to students
0-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+ 80+
Work mainly
incomplete
and /or
weaknesses in
most areas
Most elements
completed;
weaknesses
outweigh
strengths
Most elements
are strong,
minor
weaknesses
Strengths in all
elements

8. Most work
exceeds the
standard
expected
All work
substantially
exceeds the
standard
expected
https://share.coventry.ac.uk/students/Registry/Pages/Deferrals-
and-Extension.aspx
This document is for Coventry University students for their own
use in completing their assessed work for this module and
should not be passed to third
parties or posted on any website. Any infringements of this rule
should be reported to [email protected]
Marking Rubric
GRADE
Microprocessors Parallel Computing Algorithm
Implementation Presentation
First
≥70
Presentation of data on different

9. microprocessors.
Excellent in-depth analysis and
comparison.
Appropriate conclusions drawn from
analysis.
Use of the microprocessor in a
commercial computer system has
been explored.
Recommendations made towards the
achievement of better processor
design/performance, with reference to
recent trends in computer architecture.
Use of journal/conference articles in
research.
Well referenced report, with in-text
citations.
Excellent in-depth analysis.
Appropriate conclusions drawn from
analysis.
Recommendations made regarding
which architecture works best for a
given task
Use of journal/conference articles in
research.
Well referenced report, with in-text

10. citations.
Well written comparison, easy to
read.
Differences between parallelisation
methods shown in chart form, or
some other well laid out fashion.
Conclusions drawn after
comparisons
Complete implementation of
chosen algorithm.
Well written code; clear and
concise.
Non-basic features of
instruction set used.
Excellent presentation
with cover page, table of
content, and page
numbers.
Tables and figures are
properly labelled.
Upper
Second
60-69

11. Presentation of data on different
microprocessors.
Very good analysis and comparison.
Appropriate conclusions drawn from
analysis.
Use of the microprocessor in a
commercial computer system has
been explored.
Recommendations made towards the
achievement of better processor
design/performance, with reference to
recent trends in computer architecture.
Well referenced report, with in-text
citations.
Very good analysis.
Appropriate conclusions drawn from
analysis.
Recommendations made regarding
which architecture works best for a
given task.
Well referenced report, with in-text
citations.
Well written comparison, easy to
read.
Differences between parallelisation

12. methods shown in chart form, or
some other well laid out fashion.
Complete implementation of
chosen algorithm.
Well written code; clear and
concise.
Very good presentation
with cover page, table of
content, and page
numbers.
Tables and figures may
not be properly labelled.
Lower
Second
50-59
Presentation of data on different
microprocessors.
Good analysis and comparison.
Conclusions drawn from analysis.
Evidence of referencing.
Good analysis.

13. Conclusions drawn from analysis.
Comparisons hard to follow.
Evidence of referencing.
Complete implementation of
chosen algorithm.
Code would work but is not
easy to follow.
Good presentation with
only one of the following
missing: cover page,
table of content, and
page numbers.
Tables and figures may
not be properly labelled.
This document is for Coventry University students for their own
use in completing their assessed work for this module and
should not be passed to third
parties or posted on any website. Any infringements of this rule
should be reported to [email protected]
Third
40-49

14. Presentation of data on different
microprocessors.
Limited analysis and comparison.
Limited analysis.
Limited comparison
Incomplete implementation of
chosen algorithm
Fairly good presentation
with some of the
following missing: cover
page, table of content,
and page numbers.
Tables and figures may
not be properly labelled.
Fail
<40
Very little or no evidence of research
work.
Very little or no evidence of research
work.
No attempt to analyse the different

15. architectures
No attempt to implement an
algorithm
No attempt made at a
decent presentation.
Late
submission
0 0 0 0
Marks
Awarded
This document is for Coventry University students for their own
use in completing their
assessed work for this module and should not be passed to third
parties or posted on any
website. Any infringements of this rule should be reported to
[email protected]