Actel is now the only FPGA vendor with hard-core processor in the latest family
in [FPGA]
|
Prev: Announce: 1 Pin Interface - FPGA and HW debug tool
Next: CFP with Extended Deadline of Mar. 21, 2010: The 2010 International Conference on Embedded Systems and Applications (ESA'10), USA, July 2010
From: Antti on 4 Mar 2010 13:56 as Xilinx has dropped hard processor IP in the latest families it makes ACTEL the only FPGA vendor whos latest product family does have hard processor IP. Smart fusion includes Cortex-M3, and yes its available now, I did have the kits in my hand at embedded Antti
From: -jg on 4 Mar 2010 14:08 On Mar 5, 7:56 am, Antti <antti.luk...(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > as Xilinx has dropped hard processor IP in the latest families it > makes ACTEL the only FPGA vendor whos latest product family does have > hard processor IP. > > Smart fusion includes Cortex-M3, and yes its available now, I did have > the kits in my hand at embedded > > Antti Did they mention a price for the A2F060 ? The A2F200 hits that old 'all things to all users' conundrum : Price! (and package..) eg you can buy the 'right sized' uC for these sort of prices, and add the 'right sized' ProASIC from another selection list ? [STM32 Value Line $0.85 : 10K : 16Kbyte 48-pin LQFP48 $1.44 : 10K : 64Kbyte 64-pin LQFP64 ] Cypress has the PSoC3 in open samples, and supposedly the PSoC5 in more stealth samples ? -jg
From: Andy Peters on 4 Mar 2010 15:14 On Mar 4, 11:56 am, Antti <antti.luk...(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > as Xilinx has dropped hard processor IP in the latest families it > makes ACTEL the only FPGA vendor whos latest product family does have > hard processor IP. Putting a processor inside an FPGA has proven to us to be a bigger PITA than it's worth. Consider than instead of V4FX, you can use an S3AN and a standalone PPC and you'll pay a whole lot less. Plus the various Freescale PPCs have DDR memory and Ethernet and DMA controllers that don't suck, and you're not stuck with crappy tools. Embedding the processor in the FPGA is an interesting idea, but as long as Brand X seems to think that the only people who do are the types who want to run Linux on an FPGA, it's gonna suck for actual embedded use. -a
From: -jg on 4 Mar 2010 16:08 On Mar 5, 9:14 am, Andy Peters <goo...(a)latke.net> wrote: > Putting a processor inside an FPGA has proven to us to be a bigger PITA than it's worth. > Consider than instead of V4FX, you can use an S3AN and a standalone > PPC and you'll pay a whole lot less. Plus the various Freescale PPCs > have DDR memory and Ethernet and DMA controllers that don't suck, and > you're not stuck with crappy tools. Yes, you should always 'reality check' the alternatives. It can make sense if the resource really is 'free', but SRAM FPGA's still need external code memory, and when you look at those newest uC prices, they are LESS than SRAM!! We could use the A2F060, if the price and package are right. - but we consider it more a uC + CPLD, than a FPGA. -jg
From: Antti on 5 Mar 2010 04:44
On Mar 4, 11:08 pm, -jg <jim.granvi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 5, 9:14 am, Andy Peters <goo...(a)latke.net> wrote: > > > Putting a processor inside an FPGA has proven to us to be a bigger PITA than it's worth. > > Consider than instead of V4FX, you can use an S3AN and a standalone > > PPC and you'll pay a whole lot less. Plus the various Freescale PPCs > > have DDR memory and Ethernet and DMA controllers that don't suck, and > > you're not stuck with crappy tools. > > Yes, you should always 'reality check' the alternatives. > It can make sense if the resource really is 'free', but SRAM FPGA's > still need external code memory, and when you look at those newest uC > prices, they are LESS than SRAM!! > > We could use the A2F060, if the price and package are right. - but we > consider it more a uC + CPLD, than > a FPGA. > > -jg dont judge on the mouser pricing yet, the price issue will be key issue that is recognized by Actel also, specially A2F060 must come to low price to make it an option to choose at all, at the mouser prices for A2F200 i guess it would be very little applications where on would pay that price Antti |