XU1541 and more USB stuff
in [Commodore]
|
From: Suudy on 28 Jan 2008 10:48 On Jan 27, 8:19 pm, Kris Vorwerk <kris.vorw...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I think Xilinx and Altera parts are used due to their free tools being > > available. > > Minor aside: Actel also makes a version of its tools available for > free download and use. (AFAIK, it comes with Modelsim, Synplify, and > supports programming up to the mid-size Flash devices.) That was definitely considered when I mentioned Actel. At work, we use Xilinx based parts for a couple of reasons. First, they have the best densities available. Actel doesn't even come close when talking about the number of available gates. The Xilinx support, in the form of field reps, is incredible. We have had amazing support with the technical issues over the years. And it is hard to justify switching to an unknown. And the worst reason--it has been what we have been using for years. I suspect that is part of the decision on the 1541 Ultimate. It is what they are used to. Personally, if I were to use an FPGA in my project, I'd go with an Actel part. The tools are free, they have 1 or 2 power supplies (instead of the 3 sometimes 4 on parts--3V3, 2V5, and 1V2 on my current work project).
From: Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch on 28 Jan 2008 13:04 On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:04:07 +0000, Peter Schepers wrote: > Now who in their right mind would hold the image in memory? > > […] > >>You don't want to mess up with the >>don't-waste-my-bytes-people, do you? Once there were >>big discussions, if the G64 format shoudl include >>compression, single compressed tracks, smart GCR >>specific encoding/compression techniques to save as >>much space as possible. > > Silly argument especially when G64 is not prevalent enough to worry about > unused space. I couldn't care less about those that complain about wasted > space... bring em on! Compression would only make dealing with G64, > especially interactiv You think in the age of 2 GiB address spaces no one in their right mind would hold the image in memory but it's no problem to waste space on disk!? :-) Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
From: Kris Vorwerk on 29 Jan 2008 21:49 Hi, > Personally, if I were to use an FPGA in my > project, I'd go with anActelpart. The tools are free, they have 1 > or 2 power supplies (instead of the 3 sometimes 4 on parts--3V3, 2V5, > and 1V2 on my current work project). cool, good to hear. :) > That was definitely considered when I mentionedActel. At work, we > use Xilinx based parts for a couple of reasons. First, they have the > best densities available. Acteldoesn't even come close when talking > about the number of available gates. True enough, the Flash-based parts that Actel offers are largely targeted toward small-to-medium-sized applications, whereas Xilinx and Altera typically compete in the ultra-large FPGA segment. I think that Actel's major strengths (relative to Xilinx or Altera) lie in terms of low-power, low-cost, and system-on-chip integration (e.g., the Igloo and Fusion devices, coupled with the freely-available Arm cores and so forth). At any rate, please keep us in mind in the future; our FAEs and support teams are happy to field any questions that you may have. regards, Kris Vorwerk Staff Software Engineer Physical Design, Actel Corp.
From: BruceMcF on 31 Jan 2008 11:14 On Jan 29, 9:49 pm, Kris Vorwerk <kris.vorw...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > Personally, if I were to use an FPGA in my > > project, I'd go with anActelpart. The tools are free, they have 1 > > or 2 power supplies (instead of the 3 sometimes 4 on parts--3V3, 2V5, > > and 1V2 on my current work project). > > cool, good to hear. :) > > > That was definitely considered when I mentionedActel. At work, we > > use Xilinx based parts for a couple of reasons. First, they have the > > best densities available. Acteldoesn't even come close when talking > > about the number of available gates. > > True enough, the Flash-based parts that Actel offers are largely > targeted toward small-to-medium-sized applications, whereas Xilinx and > Altera typically compete in the ultra-large FPGA segment. I think > that Actel's major strengths (relative to Xilinx or Altera) lie in > terms of low-power, low-cost, and system-on-chip integration (e.g., > the Igloo and Fusion devices, coupled with the freely-available Arm > cores and so forth). > > At any rate, please keep us in mind in the future; our FAEs and > support teams are happy to field any questions that you may have. > > regards, > Kris Vorwerk > Staff Software Engineer > Physical Design, Actel Corp. Are there any minimal-Forth-processor-on-chip soft cores for Actel parts? Oh, and 65C02 machine code cores, or is that too big?
From: Suudy on 31 Jan 2008 13:58
On Jan 29, 6:49 pm, Kris Vorwerk <kris.vorw...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > That was definitely considered when I mentionedActel. At work, we > > use Xilinx based parts for a couple of reasons. First, they have the > > best densities available. Acteldoesn't even come close when talking > > about the number of available gates. > > True enough, the Flash-based parts that Actel offers are largely > targeted toward small-to-medium-sized applications, whereas Xilinx and > Altera typically compete in the ultra-large FPGA segment. I think > that Actel's major strengths (relative to Xilinx or Altera) lie in > terms of low-power, low-cost, and system-on-chip integration (e.g., > the Igloo and Fusion devices, coupled with the freely-available Arm > cores and so forth). However, the ARM core is a soft-core. The advantage of the Virtex 4 with a hard PowerPC is that we don't have to waste fabric resources on the processor. And timing (at least in our Microblaze systems) is always a problem in the processor itself--rarely in the peripherals. I don't know how well the ARM performs, but if the Microblaze is any guide, that could be a problem as well. What system-on-chip integration in relation to the Igloo and Fusion are you referencing? > At any rate, please keep us in mind in the future; our FAEs and > support teams are happy to field any questions that you may have. For a personal project, heck yeah. However, for work, we require the densities that Xilinx provides. When Actel can provide us with DSP48- like logic and megabits of on-chip RAM, I'd be all over it. We especially like the flash nature of the part, which makes soft error nearly moot. Low power is a benefit as well, though that is rarely a concern on our FPGA designs. Are the FAE's available for support on hobby projects? :) But in reality, if the support was there for a hobby project, it could make it much easier to convince the powers-that-be that Actel is the way to go for our production based designs. Pete |