Who is working with the SAM9263?
in [Embedded]
|
From: Ulf Samuelsson on 1 Apr 2007 19:20 >> >> You can get the real thing from >> www.mechtronicbrick.dk ==> www.mechatronicbrick.dk >> www.ronetix.ch ==> http://www.ronetix.at/ >> www.cogcomp.com >> www.iotech.dk >> www.liab.dk > > I could not get some of these links to work. But the others gave some > good results. Cogent has a 520 MHz PXA270 module for only $50 more > than the SAM9260 module. Way better deal and a *HUGH* increase in > speed! I have been looking for something like this. > Funny, I remember communicating with a guy recently which balked at $600 price for a development kit with Ethernet and $975 for DevKit with Ethernet and LCD screen. The PXA270 DIMM is $399 DIMM in single qty. If you want to get a single DIMM with baseboard, it is $1499. With QVGA LCD = $1799.. If you need VGA or better resolution, then a dual bus system like the www.iotech.dk module and the AT91RM9200 is probably faster than the PXA, since you do not steal bandwidth from the CPU and you have several interesting accelerators. The VGA controller, they have implemented in the FPGA collects windows on the fly, so no heavy bitblt in the processor just to move windows, or handle overlapping windows. The AT91SAM9263, which is likely to soon be available from a number of module companies, also has a dual bus structure so you can have pretty large screens without affecting the CPU performance. The Ronetix module has a complete frame buffer inside, and if you make all redraws in this for a QVGA screen, you have up to 800 MB/s bandwidth to the memory. The effect is about 2 x performance compared to doing draws to SDRAM. MHz is not everything. >> The I/O tech has 8 MB Flash and 16 MB SDRAM and sells for 68 Euro(a)1k >> You can get it with up to 16 MB flash and 64 MB SDRAM >> There is also an FPGA option with Spartan III (up to 1.2 Mgates) >> and another 64 MB SDRAM, all for 149 Euro(a)1k >> It is a pity that the gateway has an AVR32 at such an outrageous price going up to almost 5% of the price of the PXA270 kit (single quantity). One would expect to get at least a QVGA LCD included for that price, I agree ;-) -- Best Regards, Ulf Samuelsson This is intended to be my personal opinion which may, or may not be shared by my employer Atmel Nordic AB
From: rickman on 1 Apr 2007 20:44 On Apr 1, 7:16 pm, "Ulf Samuelsson" <u...(a)a-t-m-e-l.com> wrote: > >> You can get the real thing from > >>www.mechtronicbrick.dk ==>www.mechatronicbrick.dk > >>www.ronetix.ch ==>http://www.ronetix.at/ > >>www.cogcomp.com > >>www.iotech.dk > >>www.liab.dk > > > I could not get some of these links to work. But the others gave some > > good results. Cogent has a 520 MHz PXA270 module for only $50 more > > than the SAM9260 module. Way better deal and a *HUGH* increase in > > speed! I have been looking for something like this. > > Funny, I remember communicating with a guy recently which > balked at $600 price for a development kit with Ethernet > and $975 for DevKit with Ethernet and LCD screen. Yes, that is $50 more than *their* price, not yours. It is $600 less than your board. > The PXA270 DIMM is $399 DIMM in single qty. > If you want to get a single DIMM with baseboard, it is $1499. > With QVGA LCD = $1799.. Your LCD is a tiny thing that is of no value to me. I can connect whatever I want to their PXA module with a starting price of $400! That's $600 less than your 9263 board. I can get lots of good LCDs for that price, and they fit *my* needs, not a arbitrary choice. If the LCD is what is driving up the price of your board, maybe you should consider selling the LCD separately. > If you need VGA or better resolution, then a dual bus system > like thewww.iotech.dkmodule and the AT91RM9200 is > probably faster than the PXA, since you do not steal bandwidth > from the CPU and you have several interesting accelerators. > The VGA controller, they have implemented in the FPGA > collects windows on the fly, so no heavy bitblt in the processor > just to move windows, or handle overlapping windows. I am not sure what application you are thinking about, but I don't expect this to be a general purpose computer that has to solve spread sheets while managing a full size display. I seem to remember 386 AT computers managing Windows very adequately as long as you didn't ask it to swap out memory. So I don't think I will need special FPGA hardware to manage a display in a handheld device. > The AT91SAM9263, which is likely to soon be available from > a number of module companies, also has a dual bus structure > so you can have pretty large screens without affecting the CPU > performance. I would like to consider that. But how long will I have to wait for an eval board in a reasonable price range? > The Ronetix module has a complete frame buffer inside, and > if you make all redraws in this for a QVGA screen, > you have up to 800 MB/s bandwidth to the memory. > The effect is about 2 x performance compared to > doing draws to SDRAM. > > MHz is not everything. No, but it is very important. What happens with the 9263 when I go to a full VGA?
From: Ulf Samuelsson on 2 Apr 2007 01:26 "rickman" <gnuarm(a)gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet news:1175474691.077254.15870(a)l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > On Apr 1, 7:16 pm, "Ulf Samuelsson" <u...(a)a-t-m-e-l.com> wrote: >> >> You can get the real thing from >> >>www.mechtronicbrick.dk ==>www.mechatronicbrick.dk >> >>www.ronetix.ch ==>http://www.ronetix.at/ >> >>www.cogcomp.com >> >>www.iotech.dk >> >>www.liab.dk >> >> > I could not get some of these links to work. But the others gave some >> > good results. Cogent has a 520 MHz PXA270 module for only $50 more >> > than the SAM9260 module. Way better deal and a *HUGH* increase in >> > speed! I have been looking for something like this. >> >> Funny, I remember communicating with a guy recently which >> balked at $600 price for a development kit with Ethernet >> and $975 for DevKit with Ethernet and LCD screen. > > Yes, that is $50 more than *their* price, not yours. It is $600 less > than your board. > > >> The PXA270 DIMM is $399 DIMM in single qty. >> If you want to get a single DIMM with baseboard, it is $1499. >> With QVGA LCD = $1799.. > > Your LCD is a tiny thing that is of no value to me. I can connect > whatever I want to their PXA module with a starting price of $400! > That's $600 less than your 9263 board. What can you do with a DIMM board without connectors? The equivalent board is the $1799. If you skip the LCD, and buy your own, then it is still $1499. If you are prepared to design your own baseboard, then you can get a chip for free. If you burn a PXA module as part of the baseboard design, then you are close to the cost of the 9263EK Time to market can't be a concern if you are prepared to wait for a working baseboard before you start. > I can get lots of good LCDs > for that price, and they fit *my* needs, not a arbitrary choice. If > the LCD is what is driving up the price of your board, maybe you > should consider selling the LCD separately. > > >> If you need VGA or better resolution, then a dual bus system >> like thewww.iotech.dkmodule and the AT91RM9200 is >> probably faster than the PXA, since you do not steal bandwidth >> from the CPU and you have several interesting accelerators. >> The VGA controller, they have implemented in the FPGA >> collects windows on the fly, so no heavy bitblt in the processor >> just to move windows, or handle overlapping windows. > > I am not sure what application you are thinking about, but I don't > expect this to be a general purpose computer that has to solve spread > sheets while managing a full size display. I seem to remember 386 AT > computers managing Windows very adequately as long as you didn't ask > it to swap out memory. So I don't think I will need special FPGA > hardware to manage a display in a handheld device. > IIRC, the 386 class processors only visibly moved the outline of a window and not the complete window in itself, maybe even with WinCE, the performance needs have increased since then. I know for sure a number of guys starting with PXA, and ending up with an external display controller when going past the QVGA. If QVGA is OK, then SAM9261 will excel, due to its internal 160 kB SRAM. Since the AT91RM9200 does not have a display controller, it needs something outside and the FPGA will support large screens like SVGA/XVGA, something I doubt the PXA will handle. > >> The AT91SAM9263, which is likely to soon be available from >> a number of module companies, also has a dual bus structure >> so you can have pretty large screens without affecting the CPU >> performance. > > I would like to consider that. But how long will I have to wait for > an eval board in a reasonable price range? > You can't do zilch with the DIMM module, unless you have a baseboard, so you will have to develop your own board. If you dont value time, why not start with a chip? Since the part is just about to enter production, you will not find anything, but I know there are DIMM modules coming as soon as they can get production volumes. My best guess is May/June. How fast you can turn around a baseboard for the PXA? What will be the long term cost of using the Cogcomp module? How will that compare to doing your own design? > >> The Ronetix module has a complete frame buffer inside, and >> if you make all redraws in this for a QVGA screen, >> you have up to 800 MB/s bandwidth to the memory. >> The effect is about 2 x performance compared to >> doing draws to SDRAM. >> >> MHz is not everything. > > No, but it is very important. What happens with the 9263 when I go to > a full VGA? The part was optimized for a VGA screen 24 bit per pixel. A typical design would use one 32 bit bus (EBI0) for O/S and application and a 16 bit bus (EBI1) for display refresh. IMHO, The way a decent driver should work is that the 9263 will nmaintain a single buffer to draw the screen in a 32 bit SDRAM on EBI0, with the help of the 2D accelerator (Line drawing, Fill etc.) Once a screen is ready, it can be copied from EBI0 to EBI1 by the scather/gather memory to memory DMA. In EBI1 it should be double buffered. If you use SDRAM for EBI1 at 100 MHz /16 bit, your max throughput is 200 MB/s Don't know sustainable throughput but I hope 120 MB/s is not overly optimistic. VGA at 24 bit per pixel is 921600 bytes per frame @ 60 Hz < 60 MB, so you are using less than half the bandwidth to maintain screen refresh and leaving half the bandwidth for DMA. With 16 bit VGA, then you need about 40 MB/s and it becomes realistic to use a PSRAM, with which you get more I/O pins, some of them real useable. Typically you would not need to update the screen at the same rate as display refresh, and every time this happens, you gain bandwidth. VGA or no QVGA, the display refresh does not affect the performance of the chip, except for the cost of DMA; and the small latency coming from the need to copy before you display. You could of course at the cost of bandwidth always do display refesh from the 32 bit SDRAM the until the frame is in the EBI1. -- Best Regards, Ulf Samuelsson This is intended to be my personal opinion which may, or may not be shared by my employer Atmel Nordic AB
From: rickman on 2 Apr 2007 08:03 On Apr 2, 1:26 am, "Ulf Samuelsson" <u...(a)a-t-m-e-l.com> wrote: > "rickman" <gnu...(a)gmail.com> skrev i > > Your LCD is a tiny thing that is of no value to me. I can connect > > whatever I want to their PXA module with a starting price of $400! > > That's $600 less than your 9263 board. > > What can you do with a DIMM board without connectors? > The equivalent board is the $1799. > If you skip the LCD, and buy your own, then it is still $1499. > If you are prepared to design your own baseboard, then you > can get a chip for free. > If you burn a PXA module as part of the baseboard design, > then you are close to the cost of the 9263EK > Time to market can't be a concern if you are prepared > to wait for a working baseboard before you start. You are such a trip! Again you miss the point. If your board is $600 more because it has an LCD and the baseboard does not, then you need to think about leaving the LCD off and charging $600 less, or are you now saying that it is the connectors that are running up the cost of the module? The PXA is a *much* faster chip for nearly any purpose. You can argue that the 9263 will do this and will do that special thing, but that still does not put it in the same class as the PXA devices. In the end there is no way to justify the high prices of your ARM9 evaluation boards. Remember, Cogent was a company that *you* recommended in your post, not me. If the DIMM connector board is such a bad idea, why did you suggest it for the SAM92xx devices? > > I am not sure what application you are thinking about, but I don't > > expect this to be a general purpose computer that has to solve spread > > sheets while managing a full size display. I seem to remember 386 AT > > computers managing Windows very adequately as long as you didn't ask > > it to swap out memory. So I don't think I will need special FPGA > > hardware to manage a display in a handheld device. > > IIRC, the 386 class processors only visibly moved the outline of a window > and not the complete window in itself, maybe even with WinCE, the > performance needs have increased since then. > I know for sure a number of guys starting with PXA, and > ending up with an external display controller when going past the QVGA. My Windows 2000 running on a 1.4 GHz processor *still* moves the outline, not the actual window, until you let go of the button! I have not used PDAs other than the Palm, but the Palm does not move windows. I think this is a poor choice for a critical function that needs to be accellerated. > If QVGA is OK, then SAM9261 will excel, due to its internal 160 kB SRAM. > > Since the AT91RM9200 does not have a display controller, it > needs something outside and the FPGA will support large screens > like SVGA/XVGA, something I doubt the PXA will handle. To me that makes it a poor choice when using a display. FPGAs are very poor on power consumption and they don't come in anything remotely like a small package. We will see what works, at least we will get the chance to evaluate some processors on boards that don't cost quite so much. > > I would like to consider that. But how long will I have to wait for > > an eval board in a reasonable price range? > > You can't do zilch with the DIMM module, unless you have > a baseboard, so you will have to develop your own board. > If you dont value time, why not start with a chip? Are you saying the 9263 will only be available on a DIMM? I thought you were producing a compete eval board??? > Since the part is just about to enter production, you will not > find anything, but I know there are DIMM modules coming > as soon as they can get production volumes. > My best guess is May/June. > > How fast you can turn around a baseboard for the PXA? > What will be the long term cost of using the Cogcomp module? > How will that compare to doing your own design? Why are you focusing on the Cogent module? I am asking about *your* eval board. > > No, but it is very important. What happens with the 9263 when I go to > > a full VGA? > > The part was optimized for a VGA screen 24 bit per pixel. > A typical design would use one 32 bit bus (EBI0) for O/S and application > and a 16 bit bus (EBI1) for display refresh. > > IMHO, The way a decent driver should work is that the 9263 > will nmaintain a single buffer to draw the screen in a 32 bit SDRAM on EBI0, > with the help of the 2D accelerator (Line drawing, Fill etc.) > > Once a screen is ready, it can be copied from EBI0 to EBI1 > by the scather/gather memory to memory DMA. > In EBI1 it should be double buffered. > > If you use SDRAM for EBI1 at 100 MHz /16 bit, your max throughput is 200 > MB/s > Don't know sustainable throughput but I hope 120 MB/s is not overly > optimistic. > VGA at 24 bit per pixel is 921600 bytes per frame @ 60 Hz < 60 MB, > so you are using less than half the bandwidth to maintain screen refresh > and leaving half the bandwidth for DMA. > With 16 bit VGA, then you need about 40 MB/s and it becomes realistic > to use a PSRAM, with which you get more I/O pins, some of them real useable. > > Typically you would not need to update the screen at the same rate > as display refresh, and every time this happens, you gain bandwidth. > > VGA or no QVGA, the display refresh does not affect the performance of the > chip, > except for the cost of DMA; and the small latency coming from the need to > copy before > you display. > You could of course at the cost of bandwidth always do display refesh from > the > 32 bit SDRAM the until the frame is in the EBI1. I hadn't considered the power issues of driving a larger display. This all sounds very power intensive. Driving a VGA type display may well use more power than the rest of the system.
From: Ulf Samuelsson on 2 Apr 2007 13:25
> > You are such a trip! Again you miss the point. If your board is $600 > more expensive [snip] Baseboard + 1 x CPU Module = $1499 Without QVGA LCD Baseboard + 2 x CPU Module = $1899 Without QVGA LCD Baseboard + 3 x CPU Module = $2299 Without QVGA LCD ------------------------------------------- SAM9260EK = ~$600 SAM9261EK =~$1000 With QVGA LCD SAM9263EK =~$1000 With QVGA LCD Just to get your math right. -- Best Regards, Ulf Samuelsson This is intended to be my personal opinion which may, or may not be shared by my employer Atmel Nordic AB |