Site Home   Archive Home   FAQ Home   How to search the Archive   How to Navigate the Archive   
Compare FPGA features and resources   

Threads starting:
1994JulAugSepOctNovDec1994
1995JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1995
1996JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1996
1997JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1997
1998JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1998
1999JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1999
2000JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2000
2001JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2001
2002JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2002
2003JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2003
2004JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2004
2005JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2005
2006JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2006
2007JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2007
2008JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2008
2009JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2009
2010JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2010
2011JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2011
2012JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2012
2013JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2013
2014JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2014
2015JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2015
2016JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2016
2017JanFebMarApr2017

Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Custom Search

Messages from 38775

Article: 38775
Subject: Synthsis Tools for Xilinx
From: "Shawn" <shineline@home.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 21:10:52 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
    I have been using FPGA express with the Xilinx foundation software.  I
found it to be a good tool.  Unfortunately, Xilinx will no longer be
supplying FPGA express with its other software. Does anyone know if there
the Xilinx synthesis tool (XST) is comparable in performance to FPGA
Express?  Is there an article comparing the performance of the major
synthesis tools for Xilinx (FPGA Express, Exemplar, Synplicity, XST, etc)?
The majority of the people I have spoken with seem to prefer Synplicity, but
the majority of them have very limited or no exposure to the other tools.

Thank you in advance,
Shawn Hineline

--
*******************************
Shawn Hineline
Optimum Engineering, Inc.




Article: 38776
Subject: Re: Synthsis Tools for Xilinx
From: Ray Andraka <ray@andraka.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 22:56:30 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Leo and Synplicity are more capable (and more expensive) tools.  I personally
prefer Synplicity.  I have used both FPGA express and XST some.  XST has come a
long way since it was first introduced.  It is comparable to, and in some
respects better than, the FPGA Express that had been packaged with foundation.
XST does handle inference of Xilinx structures better than FPGA express, but
don't try to use it with another vendor's stuff.  My recommendation?  If you
liked FPGA express, you will like XST and will probably be quite pleased with
its performance.  If you've been used to Synplicity, then you may be frustrated
at times with XST.

Shawn wrote:

>     I have been using FPGA express with the Xilinx foundation software.  I
> found it to be a good tool.  Unfortunately, Xilinx will no longer be
> supplying FPGA express with its other software. Does anyone know if there
> the Xilinx synthesis tool (XST) is comparable in performance to FPGA
> Express?  Is there an article comparing the performance of the major
> synthesis tools for Xilinx (FPGA Express, Exemplar, Synplicity, XST, etc)?
> The majority of the people I have spoken with seem to prefer Synplicity, but
> the majority of them have very limited or no exposure to the other tools.
>
> Thank you in advance,
> Shawn Hineline
>
> --
> *******************************
> Shawn Hineline
> Optimum Engineering, Inc.

--
--Ray Andraka, P.E.
President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
email ray@andraka.com
http://www.andraka.com

 "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little
  temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                                          -Benjamin Franklin, 1759



Article: 38777
Subject: Re: Dynamic Reconfiguration of single Xilinx FPGA
From: Peter Alfke <peter.alfke@xilinx.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 15:01:21 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
See below:

Alex Carreira wrote:

> I am pretty sure the solution is to try this with a Virtex instead, but
> first read XAPP 151 and all the others on the configuration architecture.
> It may be possible on 4000 series

No, XC4000 does not offer partial reconfiguration.

> but I don't think so (I am guessing that
> reconfiguration causes functionality to stop during reprogramming of the
> configuration memory,

yes

> which is not the case for all scenarios with the
> Virtex--of course I could be dead wrong about the 4000 series and if so
> please excuse me).

You are right on.
Let me point out, however, that even good old XC3000, XC4000 and Spartan devices
can initiate their own (complete) reconfiguration ( by pulling PROG Low) This
may seem to violate some timing specs, but it works "by design". 100% !

>
>
> You can find out if it will work the the 4000 series for sure by digging up
> an in depth ap. note on its configuration architecture (if one exists--I
> think it does but my memory on the subject is weak right now).
>
> I have had discussions with numerous people about reconfiguring a Virtex
> FPGA with its own resources.  It would be particularly slick in RTR
> (run-time-reconfigurable) applications.

Reconfiguration can be initiated ( triggered) by any Xilinx device,
partial reconfiguration only by Virtex (Spartan-II) devices.

Peter Alfke, Xilinx Applications



Article: 38778
Subject: Re: Does Xilinx Spartan-II have reserved pin for PCI?
From: Eric Crabill <eric.crabill@xilinx.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 15:17:55 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Hello,

The Spartan-II, Spartan-IIE, Virtex, and Virtex-E devices
all have the same special resources for PCI.  These resources
are, however, intended primarily for use with the Xilinx
PCI LogiCORE product -- particularly for 66 MHz designs.

If you are building a PCI implementation, and elect to do
it yourself (i.e. not buy a Xilinx PCI LogiCORE product)
you should be able to get a 33 MHz design working if you
are careful in your logic design.  There are some previous
posts on this newsgroup about another person's adventures
with a PCI implementation.

Good luck,
Eric

"Deli Geng (David)" wrote:
> Hi, there,
> 
> I'm new to Spartan-II FPGA chip. However, I need to use it in a PCI design.
> So I was wondering if some pins are dedicated for PCI or any pin can be used
> for PCI connection? BTW, can you also provide some advice on how to use
> Spartan FPGA as PCI controller?
> 
> Thanks a lot.
> 
> Regards, 
> David

Article: 38779
Subject: Re: Audio time delay circuit
From: Andy Peters <andy@exponentmedia.nospam.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 00:02:01 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Ray Andraka wrote:


> 
> Yes, I had a frequency counter years ago that had bars with numbered windows.
> Behind each was a neon bulb which would light up the correct digit.  An
> additional neon bulb lit up behind the range (Hz, kHz), and there was one
> between each column to act as a decimal point.  The display for a 59.703 Hz
> input would look something like this:
> 
>          9
>                                                     Hz
>                     7
> 
> 5
> 
>                                     3
> 
> 
>              *             0
> 

Would that model 521?  There's one in the next office.

--a


Article: 38780
Subject: Re: Coregen Half-Band FIR filter implemenation does not work
From: Andy Peters <andy@exponentmedia.nospam.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 00:06:07 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Yury wrote:

> Implemented 1/2 Band 51-tap FIR using Coregen + Foundation.
> Pre-synthesis simulation looks excellent, however when the filter is
> loaded into Spartan-II the output looks like complete random junk. All

> timing is met.


You might want to look at the model and verify if it's correct.  Watch 
out for timing information in the model (e.g.,   a <= b after 1 ns; etc) 
-- you may find that your state machines are off by one state, and it's 
the model's fault.

--a




Article: 38781
Subject: Re: Audio time delay circuit
From: Ray Andraka <ray@andraka.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 00:38:33 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
I can't even remember who made it, much less the model number.  It was about 19"
wide, maybe 10" tall.  The front panel was light grey with a dark grey cabinet
whose top and bottom covers met half way down the sides (so there were no exposed
side panels). The edges where the top and bottom met the sides were curved with
about a 3/4" radius.   I think there were steel handles on the sides where the top
and bottom covers met.  The displays were offset to the left side of the front
panel.  I vaguely remember a single digit counter module in the rear panel too, but
I don't recall what it was for.  I wish I could remember who made it.

Andy Peters wrote:

> Ray Andraka wrote:
>
> >
> > Yes, I had a frequency counter years ago that had bars with numbered windows.
> > Behind each was a neon bulb which would light up the correct digit.  An
> > additional neon bulb lit up behind the range (Hz, kHz), and there was one
> > between each column to act as a decimal point.  The display for a 59.703 Hz
> > input would look something like this:
> >
> >          9
> >                                                     Hz
> >                     7
> >
> > 5
> >
> >                                     3
> >
> >
> >              *             0
> >
>
> Would that model 521?  There's one in the next office.
>
> --a

--
--Ray Andraka, P.E.
President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
email ray@andraka.com
http://www.andraka.com

 "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little
  temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                                          -Benjamin Franklin, 1759



Article: 38782
Subject: Re: Audio time delay circuit
From: Peter Alfke <peter.alfke@xilinx.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 16:52:06 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>


Ray Andraka wrote:

> I can't even remember who made it, much less the model number.

Wasn't it by Beckman Instruments?

Peter Alfke


Article: 38783
Subject: Re: Dynamic Reconfiguration of single Xilinx FPGA
From: "Fong Chii Biao" <ericfcb@tm.net.my>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 11:19:46 +0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
oh, no, i didnt
in fact, i was using non speacial function user I/O at first. its not
working..
i tried using HDC, it can't work either..
and i even tried LDC, this is our of sense ya, and its not working (as
expected)..

one thing, i am using VHDL to design my logic,
and in the contraints editor, i set the initiate user I/O to pull up..
so, it should be pulled high once the configuration completed, shouldnt it?
i did this for double security, as i already set it high in my VHDL code..
until reconfigure is necessary.

any idea, anything wrongs that you find?
thanks again.  :)



Ray Andraka <ray@andraka.com> wrote in message
news:3C505D92.3A099E8A@andraka.com...
> Sounds like you randomly selected LDC or one of the other dual use pins
that
> goes low during configuration.  If you did that, then as soon as the chip
starts
> configuring, LDC goes low, pulling the program pin low, which restarts
> reconfiguration.  While program is low, the LDC goes high so it releases
program
> and the configuration starts until LDC goes low again.  I kind of figured
> something like that was going on.  Since you only have two configurations,
this
> should work fine as long as you avoid pins that go low during
configuration.  It
> may be best to use HDC to get a solid high level during configuration.
>
> Fong Chii Biao wrote:
>
> --Ray Andraka, P.E.
> President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
> 401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
> email ray@andraka.com
> http://www.andraka.com
>
>  "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little
>   temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
>                                           -Benjamin Franklin, 1759
>
>



Article: 38784
Subject: Re: Dynamic Reconfiguration of single Xilinx FPGA
From: "Fong Chii Biao" <ericfcb@tm.net.my>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 11:27:47 +0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Greetings , Peter
so, do you have any idea about my problems in start-up configuration?
i tried to reconfigure (completely) XC4010 by initiating it using one of the
I/O (non special function),
when i connect it directly to PROG, the start-up can't work..
its working once i disconnect it


Peter Alfke <peter.alfke@xilinx.com> wrote in message
news:3C509241.1AF3B12A@xilinx.com...
> See below:
>
> Alex Carreira wrote:
>
> > I am pretty sure the solution is to try this with a Virtex instead, but
> > first read XAPP 151 and all the others on the configuration
architecture.
> > It may be possible on 4000 series
>
> No, XC4000 does not offer partial reconfiguration.
>
> > but I don't think so (I am guessing that
> > reconfiguration causes functionality to stop during reprogramming of the
> > configuration memory,
>
> yes
>
> > which is not the case for all scenarios with the
> > Virtex--of course I could be dead wrong about the 4000 series and if so
> > please excuse me).
>
> You are right on.
> Let me point out, however, that even good old XC3000, XC4000 and Spartan
devices
> can initiate their own (complete) reconfiguration ( by pulling PROG Low)
This
> may seem to violate some timing specs, but it works "by design". 100% !
>
> >
> >
> > You can find out if it will work the the 4000 series for sure by digging
up
> > an in depth ap. note on its configuration architecture (if one exists--I
> > think it does but my memory on the subject is weak right now).
> >
> > I have had discussions with numerous people about reconfiguring a Virtex
> > FPGA with its own resources.  It would be particularly slick in RTR
> > (run-time-reconfigurable) applications.
>
> Reconfiguration can be initiated ( triggered) by any Xilinx device,
> partial reconfiguration only by Virtex (Spartan-II) devices.
>
> Peter Alfke, Xilinx Applications
>
>



Article: 38785
Subject: Re: Dynamic Reconfiguration of single Xilinx FPGA
From: Ray Andraka <ray@andraka.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 05:40:12 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
You said the program pin was toggling.  Any more detail?  ONe of two things are
happening: either it is getting pulled low as soon as configuration begins, or
it is getting pulled low at the end of configuration.  Make sure the pin you
have it connected to isn't set up to output a low on power up (ie when global
reset is active).

Check the start-up sequence.  The default,IIRC, lets go of the configuration use
for the pins one CCLK before turning on the pin drivers.  The weak internal
pullup on the user I/O may not be enough to keep program from going low.  You
might consider an external pullup on the /program pin.

Do yourself a favor, open that loop and watch the pin you are driving program
with.  If it goes low at all, then you you just have to figure out when it goes
low which should then tell you why.  If it stays high like that, put an external
pull-down to load the output and see what it does then.

Fong Chii Biao wrote:

> oh, no, i didnt
> in fact, i was using non speacial function user I/O at first. its not
> working..
> i tried using HDC, it can't work either..
> and i even tried LDC, this is our of sense ya, and its not working (as
> expected)..
>
> one thing, i am using VHDL to design my logic,
> and in the contraints editor, i set the initiate user I/O to pull up..
> so, it should be pulled high once the configuration completed, shouldnt it?
> i did this for double security, as i already set it high in my VHDL code..
> until reconfigure is necessary.
>
> any idea, anything wrongs that you find?
> thanks again.  :)
>
> Ray Andraka <ray@andraka.com> wrote in message
> news:3C505D92.3A099E8A@andraka.com...
> > Sounds like you randomly selected LDC or one of the other dual use pins
> that
> > goes low during configuration.  If you did that, then as soon as the chip
> starts
> > configuring, LDC goes low, pulling the program pin low, which restarts
> > reconfiguration.  While program is low, the LDC goes high so it releases
> program
> > and the configuration starts until LDC goes low again.  I kind of figured
> > something like that was going on.  Since you only have two configurations,
> this
> > should work fine as long as you avoid pins that go low during
> configuration.  It
> > may be best to use HDC to get a solid high level during configuration.
> >
> > Fong Chii Biao wrote:
> >
> > --Ray Andraka, P.E.
> > President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
> > 401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
> > email ray@andraka.com
> > http://www.andraka.com
> >
> >  "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little
> >   temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
> >                                           -Benjamin Franklin, 1759
> >
> >

--
--Ray Andraka, P.E.
President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
401/884-7930     Fax 401/884-7950
email ray@andraka.com
http://www.andraka.com

 "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little
  temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                                          -Benjamin Franklin, 1759



Article: 38786
Subject: www.fpga.org
From: "Con Cac" <con_cac@optusnet.com.au>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 22:23:16 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi,

I am wondering what wrong with www.fpga.org website. Is it shutdowned or
what?

Thanks




Article: 38787
Subject: Re: Analog input into Altera FLEX10K using ADC. Can anyone help??
From: "Bert Cuzeau" <bertrand.cuzeau@worldonline.fr>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:05:37 +0000 (UTC)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
> I am wondering how to determine the sampling frequency from the timing
> diagram that I obtained after simulation? 

The sampling freq has nothing to do with simulation...
The simulation relies on you specifying an external freq.
What you'll have on the board is a BOM issue...

If you are not sampling exactly at the main clock Freq
(but below it indeed), and if your processing works
1 data in -> 1 data out per clock cycle, then it is probably
not optimal, but you can simply use a global "Enable" which
will be your "sampling freq". This way, you can easily apply
input data in a non-real time way.

You know that sampling freq is a very important
Data Processing issue ! Your whole system must be built
around this value !

> And how do I enter the required
> frequency into the FPGA ? Through external crystal clock or just using
> internal FPGA Board clock (in Altera UP-1 Board ,it is 25.175MHz) ?

Again, it's you who knows what your processing is doing and
at what rate.

If you are dealing with low freq signals, then use any high speed
oscillator and get the sampling freq by division.

With high freq sampling, you must adopt a suitable main
oscillator (a multiple of the sampling freq).

Hope this helps,

  Bert Cuzeau
  http://www.alse-fr.com


-- 
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Article: 38788
Subject: Get error that part is invalid or not supported when Run from synthesis
From: "Mark Barr" <mrbarr@charter.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 02:56:14 -0600
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hello. I own 2.1i Student version.

I selected a device from the SPARTAN2 family, entered a Schematic, and
"compiled" things. All went well.

Next, I entered a VHDL entry and went to the "Synthesis/Implementation" menu
to select the target device and FPGA synthesis options. However, whenever I
select Run from the this menu, I instantly get an error dialog.

For example, if I select:

Family: XC4000E
Device: 4003EPC83

I get the following error:

"The specified part XC302A-6-PC68 is either invalid or not supported.

This similar error occurs for all families I select, except the CPLD
families XC9500,XC9500XL. Selecting these families allows me to continue
with the synthesis. Why can I only synthesize for the XC9500 & XC9500XL
families?

I have gone back to the project libraries menu and added in additional
libraries, but nothing helps. I cannot get any of the following familes to
work for synthesis: XC3000, XC4000*, SPARTAN*, XC5200, VIRTEX*

Finally, why doesn't the SPARTAN2 family an option at this menu? I was able
to select it when doing a schematic. I have added this family as a project
library.

I am new to all of this. Any help is greatly appreciated. Mark.




Article: 38789
Subject: Re: Analog input into Altera FLEX10K using ADC. Can anyone help??
From: "jcding" <jcding@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 02:29:46 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi..
   Thanks alot for all the suggestions...

I am wondering how to determine the sampling frequency from the timing
diagram that I obtained after simulation? And how do I enter the required
frequency into the FPGA ? Through external crystal clock or just using
internal FPGA Board clock (in Altera UP-1 Board ,it is 25.175MHz) ?

Thanks again...

regards,
john



Article: 38790
Subject: Question on synthesis
From: paul.lee@sli-institute.ac.uk (Paul)
Date: 25 Jan 2002 03:30:35 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Why on certain flip-flop to flip-flop paths is the setup for the final
flip flop defined as positive and in other cases negative.
We have one component where the path finishes in a xilinx xla4000 ofdx
pin ce
and the setup requirement is given as 1.5ns, while the other
component, the path finishes in FD pin D and the setup requirement is
given as -1.5 ns.

How are the setup requirements values calculated?


Thanks 

Paul

Article: 38791
Subject: Re: Synthsis Tools for Xilinx
From: Andreas Roland <ZZandreas.YYroland@siemensQQ.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 12:35:16 +0100
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hello Shawn,
Since more than two years, I'm using Synplicity's Synplify and Synplify Pro. I
bought this tool for the company I worked before, and when I started here, I
also was involved in buying this tool again!
I compared a design for both, FPGA Express and Synplify, and the results were
incredible.
In the morning I installed the tool with an evaluation license. Did the setup
for my design in the afternoon and ...
 In a fraction of runtime I got a 20% smaller design which was running at 20%
faster clock frequency!
The same day in the evening my former boss got a request to buy this tool.

If your budget allows it, I think this is the best tool to work with. For large
designs may be Synplicity's Amplify has some featuers you will need.
I'm still using Synplify Pro now and in the near future I want to try XST once.

Best regards,
Andreas.

Shawn wrote:

>     I have been using FPGA express with the Xilinx foundation software.  I
> found it to be a good tool.  Unfortunately, Xilinx will no longer be
> supplying FPGA express with its other software. Does anyone know if there
> the Xilinx synthesis tool (XST) is comparable in performance to FPGA
> Express?  Is there an article comparing the performance of the major
> synthesis tools for Xilinx (FPGA Express, Exemplar, Synplicity, XST, etc)?
> The majority of the people I have spoken with seem to prefer Synplicity, but
> the majority of them have very limited or no exposure to the other tools.
>
> Thank you in advance,
> Shawn Hineline
>
> --
> *******************************
> Shawn Hineline
> Optimum Engineering, Inc.


Article: 38792
Subject: Re: Intel vs. AMD
From: Martin Thompson <martin.j.thompson@trw.com>
Date: 25 Jan 2002 12:00:30 +0000
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
"Mark Kinsley" <Mark.Kinsley@blueyonder.co.uk> writes:

> Has anybody done any benchmarking of EDA software under different hardware
> platforms...  I'm a brand-name sucker and tend to buy Intel - but how does
> AMD compare.  And how does a Celeron compare to a similar speed P3.  I'm
> using ModelSim, Leonardo Spectrum & Quartus (all under Windows).
> 

I benchmarked P3 vs P4 recently ...
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&selm=uu1xqjbud.fsf%40trw.com

I recall testing a Celeron vs PII a long time ago and the Celeron was
quicker due to the core speed L2 cache.  I imagine PIII is somewhat
quicker than an equivalent Celeron as is has a bigger cache IIRC.

I'm awaiting an AMD system to test ....

Cheers!

Martin 

-- 
martin.j.thompson@trw.com
TRW Conekt, Solihull, UK
http://www.trw.com/conekt

Article: 38793
Subject: Xilinx webpack
From: Russell Shaw <rjshaw@iprimus.com.au>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 12:22:19 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi all,

Does the free xilinx webpack come with a technology viewer?
(shows a schematic equivalent of your vhdl)

What is used for the vhdl compiler? Is it VHDL-93?

How optimal is the routing generation, is it recommended
to 'adjust' the output manually? (for sram based fpgas)

Does it come with any timing analysis tools?

Is there anything major omitted compared to a 'real' tool?

What chip is smallish and sram based like an acex-1k30?

Article: 38794
Subject: XC2V10000 still on the Xilinx roadmap?
From: Markus.Wannemacher@FernUni-Hagen.De (Markus Wannemacher)
Date: 25 Jan 2002 15:14:18 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi all,

the biggest part of Xilinx' Virtex-II family should be
the XC2V10000 with 10 Mio. System gates.
But I can't find anymore any information 
on this part on Xilinx' web.

Only the press release:
http://www.xilinx.com/prs_rls/silicon_vir/0207_EProd_PoY.html
from Jan 23th 2002 still talks about 10 Mio. gates devices.

Can anyone comment on this?

Regards,
Markus


Article: 38795
Subject: [Spartan-II] Fastest Possibel Output Enable Time for -5 Devices ??
From: meng.engineering@bluewin.ch (Markus Meng)
Date: 25 Jan 2002 07:17:13 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hi all,

actually I need to 'fight' with the UCF File in order to decrease the delay
until the databus buffers do open from tristate to drive. I have the
following:

When dsp_csn AND dsp_rdn are low, then open the buffers of the data bus.
In the UCF-File I did the following setting, which seems impossible to meet.
Each time I get 7.5..8.3ns until the buffers are open and driving.

Can anybody give me an advice how I can improve it, without changing the
pinning or the layout...

-- Snip ucf-file

############################################################################
###
## Trying to make to Main DSP output enable faster. 24.01.2002 -mm-
TIMEGRP DSPRdDataPath = PADS(dsp_data(*));
############################################################################
###

TIMEGRP DSPRdCtrlPath = PADS(dsp_csn : dsp_rdn);

############################################################################
###

TIMESPEC TSP2P = FROM : DSPRdCtrlPath: TO : DSPRdDataPath : 6ns;
############################################################################
###

############################################################################
###
## Increase Driver Strength 25.01.2002 -mm-
NET "dsp_data(*)" IOSTANDARD = LVTTL;
NET "dsp_data(*)" DRIVE = 12;
-- Snip ucf-file

markus


--
********************************************************************
** Meng Engineering        Telefon    056 222 44 10               **
** Markus Meng             Natel      079 230 93 86               **
** Bruggerstr. 21          Telefax    056 222 44 10               **
** CH-5400 Baden           Email      meng.engineering@bluewin.ch **
********************************************************************
** Theory may inform, but Practice convinces. -- George Bain      **

Article: 38796
Subject: Re: NIOS ver 1.1.1 type boards for sale: Money making opportunity.
From: "Victor Schutte" <victors@mweb.co.za>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 17:20:59 +0200
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Valid point. A couple of my customers asked the same question. They just
want to connect the board to a 9V or 12 V supply and go. I will have to look
at the cost, size and heat implications of adding it to the PCB.

Victor



"Nial Stewart" <nials@britain.agilent.com> wrote in message
news:3C4FD9D8.57425BBC@britain.agilent.com...
> Victor Schutte wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > Requirements: A PC with Win98 or Win2000,  serial port and Power supply
> > (2.5V, 3.3V and 5V).
>
> Victor, you might find the requirement for 3 power
> supplies will put people off.
>
> Could you not add regulators for the 3.3 and 2.5v supplies?
>
>
> Nial.



Article: 38797
Subject: Re: Intel vs. AMD
From: jhansen007@aol.com (Ensign Jimmy)
Date: 25 Jan 2002 08:34:02 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
"Mark Kinsley" <Mark.Kinsley@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<OrQ38.1033$J92.7659561@news-text.cableinet.net>...
> Has anybody done any benchmarking of EDA software under different hardware
> platforms...  I'm a brand-name sucker and tend to buy Intel - but how does
> AMD compare.  And how does a Celeron compare to a similar speed P3.  I'm
> using ModelSim, Leonardo Spectrum & Quartus (all under Windows).
> 
>  I've seen loads of benchmarks on the web which talk about games, office
> apps and perhaps DTP - which of these applications is most simliar to EDA
> software ?
> 
> Mark

I'm currently using Xilinx's Foundation series software.  I've had the
pleasure of testing it on both my home machine, which is an AMD Duron
750 MHz w/ WinME and 512 MB of RAM, and a Dell PIII 800 MHz, w/
Win2000 and 512 MB or RAM at school.  I can't say I've seen much
difference between the two machines, though the PIII is just a bit
faster.

Cheers,

Jim.

Article: 38798
Subject: Re: [Spartan-II] Fastest Possibel Output Enable Time for -5 Devices ??
From: John_H <johnhandwork@mail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 16:53:11 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
You're looking for input-logic-tristate_out times that are extremely low.
Admirable.  Tough.  Can't get there with just a UCF constraint.

I'm basing the info below on recent Spartan-II design efforts - different
devices may have different characteristics:

If there's no way your enables can work properly with registered control logic
(Tristate register in each IOB) then the only way to get your times is to
"trick" the IOB elements into giving you the routing without the intermediate
logic.  If you use IOB registers for the data and need the fast clock-to-out
times you may not have a choice.  If your outputs are combinatorial or if you
can push the output registers out of the IOB you have a chance.

By using the IOB tristate register as a latch (which means the output must be a
latch or combinatorial) you can work with the control signals for the data, the
enable, and/or the reset to "effectively" provide the logic you're looking for,
replicated in every output as a separate tristate latch.  The result is that the
signals don't have to get from the pads to the LUTs and back out to the pads but
can go straight from pads to pads.  This is especially helpful if your control
and data signals are on the same side of the device.

Any other attempts at improvement that I can come up with involve pin changes.

- John



Markus Meng wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> actually I need to 'fight' with the UCF File in order to decrease the delay
> until the databus buffers do open from tristate to drive. I have the
> following:
>
> When dsp_csn AND dsp_rdn are low, then open the buffers of the data bus.
> In the UCF-File I did the following setting, which seems impossible to meet.
> Each time I get 7.5..8.3ns until the buffers are open and driving.
>
> Can anybody give me an advice how I can improve it, without changing the
> pinning or the layout...
>
> -- Snip ucf-file
>
> ############################################################################
> ###
> ## Trying to make to Main DSP output enable faster. 24.01.2002 -mm-
> TIMEGRP DSPRdDataPath = PADS(dsp_data(*));
> ############################################################################
> ###
>
> TIMEGRP DSPRdCtrlPath = PADS(dsp_csn : dsp_rdn);
>
> ############################################################################
> ###
>
> TIMESPEC TSP2P = FROM : DSPRdCtrlPath: TO : DSPRdDataPath : 6ns;
> ############################################################################
> ###
>
> ############################################################################
> ###
> ## Increase Driver Strength 25.01.2002 -mm-
> NET "dsp_data(*)" IOSTANDARD = LVTTL;
> NET "dsp_data(*)" DRIVE = 12;
> -- Snip ucf-file
>
> markus
>
> --
> ********************************************************************
> ** Meng Engineering        Telefon    056 222 44 10               **
> ** Markus Meng             Natel      079 230 93 86               **
> ** Bruggerstr. 21          Telefax    056 222 44 10               **
> ** CH-5400 Baden           Email      meng.engineering@bluewin.ch **
> ********************************************************************
> ** Theory may inform, but Practice convinces. -- George Bain      **


Article: 38799
Subject: Re: XC2V10000 still on the Xilinx roadmap?
From: newman5382@aol.com (newman)
Date: 25 Jan 2002 09:49:01 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Markus.Wannemacher@FernUni-Hagen.De (Markus Wannemacher) wrote in message news:<a2rsoa$bu8$1@oak.fernuni-hagen.de>...
> Hi all,
> 
> the biggest part of Xilinx' Virtex-II family should be
> the XC2V10000 with 10 Mio. System gates.
> But I can't find anymore any information 
> on this part on Xilinx' web.
> 
> Only the press release:
> http://www.xilinx.com/prs_rls/silicon_vir/0207_EProd_PoY.html
> from Jan 23th 2002 still talks about 10 Mio. gates devices.
> 
> Can anyone comment on this?
> 
> Regards,
> Markus

The CEO of Xilinx mentioned some timeframe in the latest XCELL from
Xilinx.  Can't remember the date.

Newman



Site Home   Archive Home   FAQ Home   How to search the Archive   How to Navigate the Archive   
Compare FPGA features and resources   

Threads starting:
1994JulAugSepOctNovDec1994
1995JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1995
1996JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1996
1997JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1997
1998JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1998
1999JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec1999
2000JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2000
2001JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2001
2002JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2002
2003JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2003
2004JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2004
2005JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2005
2006JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2006
2007JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2007
2008JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2008
2009JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2009
2010JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2010
2011JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2011
2012JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2012
2013JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2013
2014JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2014
2015JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2015
2016JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2016
2017JanFebMarApr2017

Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Custom Search