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
2017JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2017
2018JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2018
2019JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2019
2020JanFebMarAprMay2020

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 98875

Article: 98875
Subject: Re: for all those who have stopped listening, and are ranting now...
From: Austin Lesea <austin@xilinx.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 07:57:44 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
John,

Stop playing the fool.

If one memory bit is bad, out of 20 million, then that FPGA can not be 
used for the general public.

But if you don't use that one bit in your patern, then that chip is 
perfect for you.

One bit.

That is all we are talking about here.  That is EasyPath(tm).

One bit.

The majority of faults that prevent a FPGA from being perfectly good, 
are just that, one fault, one bit.

One path missing (metal is open).

One bit that won't write.

One bit that won't read.

One LUT bit that can't be set.

One IO standard that isn't there.

Maybe you should go take a course on semiconductor manufacturing?  Go 
actually learn something?

Since we can't educate you, and you are unwilling to listen to us, maybe 
you should go talk to someone you trust, and will listen to?

Austin

Article: 98876
Subject: Re: Where are FPGA heading?
From: Ray Andraka <ray@andraka.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:11:52 -0500
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
pbdelete@spamnuke.ludd.luthdelete.se.invalid wrote:
> 
> Aerospace posses issues with ionizing radiation.

Xilinx has their QPRO line which is radiation tolerant for this market. 
   Aerospace was actually one of the earlier adopters of FPGAs for DSP 
applications.  I've built my business around this market and have 
completed several designs specifically intended for low earth orbit
insertion.  QPRO is not new, it has been around for close to a decade.

Article: 98877
Subject: Re: Where are FPGA heading?
From: Ray Andraka <ray@andraka.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:16:56 -0500
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Jim Granville wrote:

> Austin Lesea wrote:
> 

> -jg
> 

I suspect the truth is closer to being able to customize the FPGA at the 
time of application rather than at the time of purchase.  That means 
they can get more commonality, so that the spares inventory is much smaller.


Article: 98878
Subject: Freeware request
From: "Roger Bourne" <rover8898@hotmail.com>
Date: 17 Mar 2006 08:19:47 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Good day to one and all!

Does anyone know of any freeware that essentially dumps out the vhdl
code of digital filters?
Particurlarly IIR filters.
Basically, I imagine it will prompt you for the tap values and filter
order and ....
You get the idea.  

-Roger


Article: 98879
Subject: Re: for all those who believe in ASICs....
From: Phil Hays <Spampostmaster@comcast.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 08:28:31 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
fpga_toys@yahoo.com wrote:

> on a $100 wafer with 100 parts,

Wafer costs for leading edge processes were way over $100 in the
1980's when I was working in the semiconductor manufacturing business.
A quick google gets me:

http://www.icknowledge.com/economics/WaferCosts2005.html

Making leading edge chips is not cheap.


--
Phil Hays


Article: 98880
Subject: Re: for all those who have stopped listening, and are ranting now...
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 17 Mar 2006 09:01:12 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Austin Lesea wrote:
> John,
>
> Stop playing the fool.


If Ford decided to dump perfectly good Lincon's at 80% quoting they
were saving QC costs for the occasional scratch or miss alighed seat
frame, or what ever ... defectives ... we would laugh our heads off and
realize that it was a marketing ploy to dump product below market. If
they were laughing that they were driving a competitor out of business
by that businesss tactic at the same time we would call it dumping,
anti competitive, and a lot more ...

If any of the Asians were dumping Silicon product in the US with the
weak claim some are slightly flawed, the dumping howl wouldn't stop...

Choosing NOT to test on dies that have statistically good yields, in
order to dump product below Structured ASIC's pricing, and then start
this thread howling about driving them out of business?

So, if you want to be a Tin Aus ... by calling me a fool and raising
this to very personal attacks ... then lets get with it.

The foolish part here is gutting competitors with absolute glee, and
then getting upset when someone questions that.  I don't buy dumping X
percent of your statisicly good known chips below market is a wise
business decision, any more than I would buy Ford dumping Lincons to
drive a competitor out of business by "saving QC costs". That die is
expensive, has real value, particularly the percentage of them that are
statistically perfect.

There are people that will buy hard drives with errors, and map them
out ... practically the entire industry.

There are people that will buy FPGA's with a few bad bits too ... at
significant value, and map them out too. Or test, screen, and bin them
as the easy path program, and not use them for certain designs that are
affected, or roll a second bit stream to work on a bin selected group
with mapped failures (as easypath program suggests).

So you want to call me a fool .....

I hope there is someone in your company that has a LOT more sense ....


Article: 98881
Subject: Re: for all those who believe in ASICs....
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 17 Mar 2006 09:04:33 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

Phil Hays wrote:
> fpga_toys@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > on a $100 wafer with 100 parts,
>
> Wafer costs for leading edge processes were way over $100 in the
> 1980's when I was working in the semiconductor manufacturing business.
> A quick google gets me:
>
> http://www.icknowledge.com/economics/WaferCosts2005.html
>
> Making leading edge chips is not cheap.


We all know that ... I choose a nice round number to do math with ...
that's all ...

The whole point is that perfectly good FPGA's aren't cheap ... and to
dump them without testing them at 80% off, is dumping high value
product below it's full value.


Article: 98882
Subject: where can I find the simulation model of the sram, ISSI61LV25616?
From: "moo" <moo@bmi.be.cycu.edu.tw>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:12:11 -0600
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Hello,Everbody!!!
I'm working with the spartan3 starter kit,I want to use the on-board sram
for temporary data storage,so I hope to find the simulation model of the
sram(ISSI61LV25616-10T) for function and timing simulation .Please!
Somebody tell me where I can find the simulation model,or anybody provided
me some suggestions about how to verify the timing.Thank you!!!! 



Article: 98883
Subject: Re: Instantiating addsub, comparators in Xilinx
From: "Andy Peters" <Bassman59a@yahoo.com>
Date: 17 Mar 2006 09:15:03 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Leow Yuan Yeow wrote:
> Hi, I was doing that before but I found that each + that I use generates a
> 32-bit adder under the synthesis report which increases the LUT usage by
> quite a fraction. After that I tried to multiplex them to a addsub component
> and the LUT usage went down from 90+% to 80+% (I'm using the old RC100 board
> with spartan II so I have limited resources :( ).

It may be that the rest of your design precludes resource sharing.
Every time I've needed an adder or subtractor, I write code similar to
what Weng describes.

For example, the following code will create only one adder:

    if (add) then
        result <= a + b;
    else
        result <= a - b;
    end if;

> I was wondering if there are any other components that I can instantiate for
> comparators as well?

Why instantiate?

-a


Article: 98884
Subject: Re: Where are FPGA heading?
From: "Andy Peters" <Bassman59a@yahoo.com>
Date: 17 Mar 2006 09:44:20 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
austin wrote:

> If you buy Froto's uP, they make a new one every year, and you have no
> choice but to switch to the new unit, or stock enough of the old units
> to serve your entire replacement need.
>
> So, the car company goes to Froto, and say "Froto:  attention!  We want
> the same uP guaranteed for a long time."
>
> and Froto says: "huh?  did you hear anything?  did someone say
> something?"..."nope, must have been the wind..."

Do you really believe that?  Do you really have any evidence to back up
this claim?

I would imagine that if Ford or GM or Chrysler tells Motorola (or
whomever) that they will need however-many-million
microcontrollers/microprocessors each year for the next five, six, ten
years, Motorola will continue to make them.  Why wouldn't they?
Guaranteed orders, especially since the parts are often
customer-specific.

Maybe the imaginary Froto Company tells a major customer, "sorry, we're
not interested."

Anyways, one would imagine that replacements for existing chips would
be upgrades--more memory, more features, faster, whatever--that are
code-compatible.  Why throw away the investment in software
development?

-a


Article: 98885
Subject: Re: SerialATA with Virtex-II Pro
From: Thomas Maaø Langås <tlan@stud.ntnu.no>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 17:51:48 +0000 (UTC)
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Antti <Antti.Lukats@xilant.com> wrote:
> ok, jokes beside I have implemented a SATA OOB circuitry with NO
> external circuitry with V2Pro rocketio
> it worked with some Silicon image SATA bridge, eg i monitored the link
> to come up
> eg the in band signalling started and MGT got locked

I read somewhere that using another serdes-IC would do the trick 
with the V2Pro?  Or are you saying that creating a fully 
SATA-compatible datalogger just isn't doable? Another thing is the 
ability to connect a SATA-device to the Virtex-II Pro for 
use with linux running on the embedded PowerPC-core.


-- 
Thomas

Article: 98886
Subject: Re: Urgent Help Needed!!!!!
From: "John_H" <johnhandwork@mail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 17:58:19 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
I *sincerely* appreciate the well delivered post by JJ and the continuing 
push for professionalism from others like Mr. Alfke.  JJs post expressed 
well the opinions of the "ignorant, sneezing, bunch of fools" that will have 
the opportunity to employ you in the future.


"Chauhan" <coolsaroj@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1142596822.415346.183540@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> Jhon has added another dimension to fpga.You once again proved that
> Birds of a feather flock together.This is the characteristic to hide
> your ignorance and prooving what you know about.  Sneezing
> unnecessarily  is not going to help you man.And as you and your fellow
> partners showed that what a big fuss a bunch of fools can make to a
> FPGA problem.Forthcoming friends will always remember your contribution
> to this post.
> 



Article: 98887
Subject: Re: for all those who have stopped listening, and are ranting now...
From: "John_H" <johnhandwork@mail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 18:03:22 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
<fpga_toys@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:1142614872.436320.327150@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
<snip>
> If they were laughing that they were driving a competitor out of business
> by that businesss tactic at the same time we would call it dumping,
> anti competitive, and a lot more ...
>
> If any of the Asians were dumping Silicon product in the US with the
> weak claim some are slightly flawed, the dumping howl wouldn't stop...

"dumping" is selling something below cost, not taking a lower margin than 
premium, "perfect" products.

<snip>

> So, if you want to be a Tin Aus ... by calling me a fool and raising
> this to very personal attacks ... then lets get with it.

He doesn't have to call you anything - you make it rather obvious.

<snip>

> I hope there is someone in your company that has a LOT more sense ....

...as I hope you have access to professionals with more sense to help smooth 
out your rough edges. 



Article: 98888
Subject: Re: for all those who have stopped listening, and are ranting now...
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 17 Mar 2006 10:09:05 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

John_H wrote:
> "dumping" is selling something below cost, not taking a lower margin than
> premium, "perfect" products.

By their own statements, they do not screen the good parts first, so
depending on the wafer yield, a reasonable percentage of those are
parts ARE premium, "perfect" products being sold as low as 20% of the
normal price.


Article: 98889
Subject: Re: for all those who have stopped listening, and are ranting now...
From: "John_H" <johnhandwork@mail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 18:20:32 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
<fpga_toys@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:1142618945.752008.15170@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> John_H wrote:
>> "dumping" is selling something below cost, not taking a lower margin than
>> premium, "perfect" products.
>
> By their own statements, they do not screen the good parts first, so
> depending on the wafer yield, a reasonable percentage of those are
> parts ARE premium, "perfect" products being sold as low as 20% of the
> normal price.
>

Again, selling below MSRP is *not* dumping!

Dumping is selling parts below cost.  We're talking negative margin here.

When xilinx writes a PO for 100k devices _from_the_fab_ at $N per device, 
it's dumping if they sell that device for less than $N. 



Article: 98890
Subject: Re: for all those who have stopped listening, and are ranting now...
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 17 Mar 2006 10:26:12 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

John_H wrote:

> "dumping" is selling something below cost, not taking a lower margin than
> premium, "perfect" products.

Do the math ... if the typical product margin is above 60%, and the
typical costs of sales is some 36.6% of revenue, then dumping at 80%
discount, is recovering 20%, and well below 36.6% the typical cost.
When some percentage of those sales are statistically perfect yield
parts, that they decided not to screen I'm pretty sure any sane person
would agree that perfect parts sold at half normal "cost" is just that.
If the yield cleans up to 50-80% good parts, then program is clearly
dumping.

Now, if the offical word is that they test every part completely, and
pull the perfect parts then you would be correct.  The whole program
would make sense if they were selling known rejects. In fact, there are
a number of people that would probably stand in line for parts with a
one bit error as Austin says. Bin them into sixteen subquadrants and
people would eagerly purchase them in volume avoiding that 1/16th of
the chip with par for entire production runs.

We've heard a lot of whining about dropping non-profitable support ...
how long is a program going to last that ships as many perfect parts as
very slightly flawed parts?


Article: 98891
Subject: Re: for all those who have stopped listening, and are ranting now...
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 17 Mar 2006 10:31:49 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

John_H wrote:

> When xilinx writes a PO for 100k devices _from_the_fab_ at $N per device,
> it's dumping if they sell that device for less than $N.

if they were selling bare die, then $N would be correct.

They are however selling packaged and tested parts, so all standard
burdens, labor, buildings, IP, etc apply to the cost -- not just die
cost from the fab.


Article: 98892
Subject: Re: Urgent Help Needed!!!!!
From: "JJ" <johnjakson@gmail.com>
Date: 17 Mar 2006 10:34:24 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
I am quite happy with my flock too, although I fear some regulars have
already strayed away due to the trending down.

When we are young, we think we know everything esp we know more than
our elders.

When we are older, we just know better.

Anyway google will remember this contribution, not so sure if my memory
will!


Article: 98893
Subject: Re: for all those who believe in ASICs....
From: cs_posting@hotmail.com
Date: 17 Mar 2006 10:36:40 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Peter Alfke wrote:

> Isn't that obvious?

No, I don't think it was at all obvious that Xilinx would be willing to
sell its IP for half price.


Article: 98894
Subject: Re: for all those who have stopped listening, and are ranting now...
From: "John_H" <johnhandwork@mail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 18:53:13 GMT
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
<fpga_toys@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:1142619972.463368.89120@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
<snip>
> We've heard a lot of whining about dropping non-profitable support ...
> how long is a program going to last that ships as many perfect parts as
> very slightly flawed parts?

When the incremental sales are significant for a small percentage of Xilinx 
customers, this program should have a long, happy existence.


Oh, and your flawless understanding of market dynamics has convinced me that 
Xilinx is a bad investment.  Yeah. 



Article: 98895
Subject: Re: for all those who have stopped listening, and are ranting now...
From: fpga_toys@yahoo.com
Date: 17 Mar 2006 11:04:29 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>

John_H wrote:
> When the incremental sales are significant for a small percentage of Xilinx
> customers, this program should have a long, happy existence.
>
> Oh, and your flawless understanding of market dynamics has convinced me that
> Xilinx is a bad investment.  Yeah.

The Emperor's New Clothes ... even without clothes, he's still the
Emperor.

I assume that last straw of a jab, means that you decided that an 80%
discount is actually below cost.

Can I take my Devils Advocate hat off now?


Article: 98896
Subject: Re: for all those who have stopped listening, and are ranting now...
From: cs_posting@hotmail.com
Date: 17 Mar 2006 11:04:33 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
fpga_toys@yahoo.com wrote:

> We've heard a lot of whining about dropping non-profitable support ...
> how long is a program going to last that ships as many perfect parts as
> very slightly flawed parts?

Conversely, what really happens to the devices not originally allocated
to easypath which have single errors.  Are they crushed and returned to
the sandbox?  Or do they get a second chance at proving their worth, on
the easypath tester?


Article: 98897
Subject: Re: Instantiating addsub, comparators in Xilinx
From: Mike Treseler <mike_treseler@comcast.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:11:51 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Leow Yuan Yeow wrote:
> Does resource sharing also apply for a + sign in different states? It 
> appears the synthesizer doesn't like my code then.

If you want to share an adder,
it is best to describe exactly how in your code.

Resource sharing by synthesis requires
duplicated descriptions or a selection
that can be made either by muxing
inputs or outputs, like this:

if op1 then
     q_v := A + B;
else
     q_v := C + D;
end if;

I might duplicate a register description by mistake and
be happy about a silent band-aid from synthesis.
Or I might prefer just a warning so I can clean up my code.
Then again, I might duplicate a register just to buffer the signal
and prefer that synthesis keeps hands off.


       -- Mike Treseler

Article: 98898
Subject: Re: SerialATA with Virtex-II Pro
From: "Antti" <Antti.Lukats@xilant.com>
Date: 17 Mar 2006 11:15:01 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
almost everything is doable. the question is what is reasonable.

you could be lucky and get v2pro serdes working with SATA too with some
limitations and with huge amount of work.

as of using external SATA PHY well that would work, but the problem is
that SATA PHY is pretty much not available at all, you are welcome to
try find one, but I am 99.99% sure you will not get any. OK, that was
situation a year ago, maybe its little easier today.

sure using v2pro serders and ppc-linux would realy COOL, too bad it
doesnt work out that way :(

Antti


Article: 98899
Subject: Re: Where are FPGAs heading?
From: Austin Lesea <austin@xilinx.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:15:25 -0800
Links: << >>  << T >>  << A >>
Andy,

The only proof is in the orders, and the shipments, and what I was told.

That you, and others do not believe me is just fine.  I didn't need your 
approval to ship the parts.

Does anyone honestly think I am making this up?  I have no time for 
fantasies:  I have real work to do.  The announcement was made (and the 
part briefly shown at the press conference) for 65 nm.  Busy doesn't 
really describe my shop right now.  'Frantic' is more accurate.

A very happy, and pleasing kind of frantic.

Austin




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
2017JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2017
2018JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2018
2019JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec2019
2020JanFebMarAprMay2020

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