High Performance Biological Pairwise Sequence Alignment: FPGA versus GPU versus Cell BE versus GPP

This paper explores the pros and cons of reconfigurable computing in the form of FPGAs for high performance efficient computing. In particular, the paper presents the results of a comparative study between three different acceleration technologies, namely, Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs), Graphics Processor Units (GPUs), and IBM's Cell Broadband Engine (Cell BE), in the design and implementation of the widely-used Smith-Waterman pairwise sequence alignment algorithm, with general purpose processors as a base reference implementation. Comparison criteria include speed, energy consumption, and purchase and development costs. The study shows that FPGAs largely outperform all other implementation platforms on performance per watt criterion and perform better than all other platforms on performance per dollar criterion, although by a much smaller margin. Cell BE and GPU come second and third, respectively, on both performance per watt and performance per dollar criteria. In general, in order to outperform other technologies on performance per dollar criterion (using currently available hardware and development tools), FPGAs need to achieve at least two orders of magnitude speed-up compared to general-purpose processors and one order of magnitude speed-up compared to domain-specific technologies such as GPUs.

[1]  Tsuyoshi Hamada,et al.  A parameterisable and scalable Smith-Waterman algorithm implementation on CUDA-compatible GPUs , 2009, 2009 IEEE 7th Symposium on Application Specific Processors.

[2]  Bertil Schmidt,et al.  Hyper customized processors for bio-sequence database scanning on FPGAs , 2005, FPGA '05.

[3]  Alexandros Stamatakis,et al.  Dynamic multigrain parallelization on the cell broadband engine , 2007, PPoPP.

[4]  Ying Liu,et al.  A Highly Parameterized and Efficient FPGA-Based Skeleton for Pairwise Biological Sequence Alignment , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems.

[5]  Ying Liu,et al.  An FPGA-Based Web Server for High Performance Biological Sequence Alignment , 2009, 2009 NASA/ESA Conference on Adaptive Hardware and Systems.

[6]  Christus,et al.  A General Method Applicable to the Search for Similarities in the Amino Acid Sequence of Two Proteins , 2022 .

[7]  M S Waterman,et al.  Identification of common molecular subsequences. , 1981, Journal of molecular biology.

[8]  D. Lipman,et al.  Improved tools for biological sequence comparison. , 1988, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  Michael Farrar,et al.  Sequence analysis Striped Smith – Waterman speeds database searches six times over other SIMD implementations , 2007 .

[10]  Yuichiro Shibata,et al.  Highly efficient mapping of the Smith-Waterman algorithm on CUDA-compatible GPUs , 2010, ASAP 2010 - 21st IEEE International Conference on Application-specific Systems, Architectures and Processors.

[11]  Ali Akoglu,et al.  Performance Analysis of IBM Cell Broadband Engine on Sequence Alignment , 2009, 2009 NASA/ESA Conference on Adaptive Hardware and Systems.

[12]  B. Childs Human Biology: An introduction to human evolution, variation, growth, and adaptability , 1988 .

[13]  H. Peter Hofstee,et al.  Introduction to the Cell multiprocessor , 2005, IBM J. Res. Dev..

[14]  Maria Jesus Martin,et al.  The SWISS-PROT protein knowledgebase and its supplement TrEMBL in 2003 , 2003, Nucleic Acids Res..