Tim Wescott wrote:> On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 18:09:22 -0500, Les Cargill wrote: > >> Tim Wescott wrote: >>> On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 14:25:39 -0500, kaz wrote: >>> >>> >>>>> (Actually, I think a USENET question-answering robot would be a cool >>>>> thing for someone to try. After lurking for about a year you can >>>>> answer >>>> >>>>> most questions by just regurgitating answers to previous questions.) >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com >>>> >>>> The problem of DSPRelated G5 (Gang of 5) is not just answering posts >>>> but soon they 5 member gang start fighting each other on their >>>> comments and thoughts. >>>> >>>> It is in most cases waste of time and words to find any useful post. >>> >>> You may have a point there. So, if I'm going to pass a Turing test >>> does this mean that I need to get offended easily? >>> >>> >> >> I think people do this when they think they might not pass a Turing >> test. > > Are you implying I can't pass a Turing test? >I am not sure I can because lake bloop forble.> I'm offended. Or maybe I'm simulating. Hmm. How to tell? >-- Les Cargill
Why is this group so quiet?
Started by ●September 6, 2015
Reply by ●September 9, 20152015-09-09
Reply by ●September 9, 20152015-09-09
>Tim Wescott wrote: >> On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 18:09:22 -0500, Les Cargill wrote: >> >>> Tim Wescott wrote: >>>> On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 14:25:39 -0500, kaz wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>> (Actually, I think a USENET question-answering robot would be acool>>>>>> thing for someone to try. After lurking for about a year you can >>>>>> answer >>>>> >>>>>> most questions by just regurgitating answers to previousquestions.)>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com >>>>> >>>>> The problem of DSPRelated G5 (Gang of 5) is not just answeringposts>>>>> but soon they 5 member gang start fighting each other on their >>>>> comments and thoughts. >>>>> >>>>> It is in most cases waste of time and words to find any usefulpost.>>>> >>>> You may have a point there. So, if I'm going to pass a Turing test >>>> does this mean that I need to get offended easily? >>>> >>>> >>> >>> I think people do this when they think they might not pass a Turing >>> test. >> >> Are you implying I can't pass a Turing test? >> > >I am not sure I can because lake bloop forble. > > >> I'm offended. Or maybe I'm simulating. Hmm. How to tell? >> > >-- >Les CargillThis forum is now under attack by the Robots from next door, really. kaz --------------------------------------- Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com
Reply by ●September 9, 20152015-09-09
On 9/8/2015 5:20 PM, lasselangwadtchristensen@gmail.com wrote:> Den mandag den 7. september 2015 kl. 20.11.10 UTC+2 skrev rickman: >> On 9/6/2015 5:24 PM, Mike Field wrote: >>> I was just wondering... why is this group so quiet? >>> >>> With lots of interesting news like: >>> >>> Microsoft Extends FPGA Reach From Bing To Deep Learning - http://www.theplatform.net/2015/08/27/microsoft-extends-fpga-reach-from-bing-to-deep-learning/ >>> >>> China's FPGA Company - http://www.electronicsweekly.com/mannerisms/fpga/chinas-fpga-company-2015-09/ >>> >>> AMD patent filing hints at FPGA plans in the pipeline - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/08/11/amd_patent_filing_hints_at_fpga_plans_in_the_pipeline/ >> >> AMD getting into the FPGA market would indeed be news. I seriously >> doubt that will be happening. There are a lot of financial and patent >> barriers. >> >> I can't currently read any of your links, but it could be interesting if >> China did get into the FPGA market. But do you think they will market >> much in the US? I expect they will be pushed as alternatives to the big >> name FPGAs for use in many Chinese products which are more and more >> designed in China. There aren't many Chinese chips with much complexity >> that are used in other parts of the world. It can be very hard to get >> much info that is clear. >> > > the company is Gowin semiconductor, > > http://hackaday.com/2015/08/24/two-new-fpga-families-designed-in-china/ > > maybe they will have learned something from Espressif and their ~1$ wifi chip > As soon as English documentation and tools started to appear everyone and his cousin started doing stuff cool with themUnfortunately I am still fighting computer problems. I am unable to view a link unless I write it down and copy it to another machine. :( -- Rick
Reply by ●September 9, 20152015-09-09
Den onsdag den 9. september 2015 kl. 08.58.47 UTC+2 skrev rickman:> On 9/8/2015 5:20 PM, lasselangwadtchristensen@gmail.com wrote: > > Den mandag den 7. september 2015 kl. 20.11.10 UTC+2 skrev rickman: > >> On 9/6/2015 5:24 PM, Mike Field wrote: > >>> I was just wondering... why is this group so quiet? > >>> > >>> With lots of interesting news like: > >>> > >>> Microsoft Extends FPGA Reach From Bing To Deep Learning - http://www.theplatform.net/2015/08/27/microsoft-extends-fpga-reach-from-bing-to-deep-learning/ > >>> > >>> China's FPGA Company - http://www.electronicsweekly.com/mannerisms/fpga/chinas-fpga-company-2015-09/ > >>> > >>> AMD patent filing hints at FPGA plans in the pipeline - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/08/11/amd_patent_filing_hints_at_fpga_plans_in_the_pipeline/ > >> > >> AMD getting into the FPGA market would indeed be news. I seriously > >> doubt that will be happening. There are a lot of financial and patent > >> barriers. > >> > >> I can't currently read any of your links, but it could be interesting if > >> China did get into the FPGA market. But do you think they will market > >> much in the US? I expect they will be pushed as alternatives to the big > >> name FPGAs for use in many Chinese products which are more and more > >> designed in China. There aren't many Chinese chips with much complexity > >> that are used in other parts of the world. It can be very hard to get > >> much info that is clear. > >> > > > > the company is Gowin semiconductor, > > > > http://hackaday.com/2015/08/24/two-new-fpga-families-designed-in-china/ > > > > maybe they will have learned something from Espressif and their ~1$ wifi chip > > As soon as English documentation and tools started to appear everyone and his cousin started doing stuff cool with them > > Unfortunately I am still fighting computer problems. I am unable to > view a link unless I write it down and copy it to another machine. :( >ok, afaict: 55nm, 1152 and 8640 LUTs, on-chip random access flash, Synopsys' Synplify Pro for synthesis, qfp100 to BGAs -Lasse
Reply by ●September 10, 20152015-09-10
On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 01:09:27 -0500, kaz wrote:>>Tim Wescott wrote: >>> On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 18:09:22 -0500, Les Cargill wrote: >>> >>>> Tim Wescott wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 14:25:39 -0500, kaz wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> (Actually, I think a USENET question-answering robot would be a > cool >>>>>>> thing for someone to try. After lurking for about a year you can >>>>>>> answer >>>>>> >>>>>>> most questions by just regurgitating answers to previous > questions.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com >>>>>> >>>>>> The problem of DSPRelated G5 (Gang of 5) is not just answering > posts >>>>>> but soon they 5 member gang start fighting each other on their >>>>>> comments and thoughts. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is in most cases waste of time and words to find any useful > post. >>>>> >>>>> You may have a point there. So, if I'm going to pass a Turing test >>>>> does this mean that I need to get offended easily? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I think people do this when they think they might not pass a Turing >>>> test. >>> >>> Are you implying I can't pass a Turing test? >>> >>> >>I am not sure I can because lake bloop forble. >> >> >>> I'm offended. Or maybe I'm simulating. Hmm. How to tell? >>> >>> >>-- >>Les Cargill > > This forum is now under attack by the Robots from next door, really. > > kaz --------------------------------------- > Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.comYour objections sound almost -- robotic. -- www.wescottdesign.com
Reply by ●September 10, 20152015-09-10
On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 23:17:25 -0400 rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:> I found their site and only the small part comes in the 100 > pin QFP. The larger part only comes in the 256 and larger > BGAs. So no magic for me. The smaller part has no > distributed RAM which seems weird and no multipliers which is > not uncommon.Go on, bite the bullet! Try the QFN32 or WLCSP25, you can get your cheap proto PCBs also from China: http://dirtypcbs.com/ There are some oddities about the parts; are there really only 3 flops per four LUTs? Anyone seen a patent? Device | GW1N-1K | GW1N-9K -------------+-----------+--------- Lut | 1,152 | 8,640 FF | 864 | 6,480 CLU Array | 11x20 | Dist. RAM | 0 | 17,280 Block SRAM | 72Kb | 198Kb NVM Bits [1] | 96K | 1,792K Mult. 18x18 | 0 | 20 Max User IO | 120 | 272 PLLs+DLLs | 0 | 2+3 WLCSP25 | 15 | QFN32 | 21 | LQFP100 | 79 | LQFP144 | 116 | MBGA160 | 120 | UBGA204 | 120 | PBGA204 | 120 | PBGA256 | | 180 PBGA484 | | 272 [1] Random Access Abbreviated from: http://gowinsemi.com.cn/productsShow.aspx?n_id=353 Jan Coombs -- email valid, else fix dots and hyphen jan4clf2014@murrayhyphenmicroftdotcodotuk
Reply by ●September 10, 20152015-09-10
> I was just wondering... why is this group so quiet? >=20Maybe the number of retulars has fallen below the critical mass. Groups sel= dom show up on google search results when I do search with google. Xilinx h= as a fairly good support comunity. Few use Microsemi anyway. Few new progra= mming languages for FPGA released every year.=20 --=20 Svenn
Reply by ●September 11, 20152015-09-11
In reply to "Svenn Are Bjerkem" who wrote the following:> > I was just wondering... why is this group so quiet? > > =20 > > Maybe the number of retulars has fallen below the critical mass. Groups sel= > dom show up on google search results when I do search with google. Xilinx h= > as a fairly good support comunity. Few use Microsemi anyway. Few new progra= > mming languages for FPGA released every year.=20 > > --=20 > SvennI think groups like this are quiet because most people join the specific forums for a particular chip manufacturer. If the chip manufacturer's support came on here it would be a lot busier. joolz -- --------------------------------- --- -- - Posted with NewsLeecher v7.0 Beta 7 Web @ http://www.newsleecher.com/?usenet ------------------- ----- ---- -- -
Reply by ●September 11, 20152015-09-11
On 9/10/2015 5:13 AM, Jan-54 wrote:> On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 23:17:25 -0400 > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I found their site and only the small part comes in the 100 >> pin QFP. The larger part only comes in the 256 and larger >> BGAs. So no magic for me. The smaller part has no >> distributed RAM which seems weird and no multipliers which is >> not uncommon. > > Go on, bite the bullet! Try the QFN32 or WLCSP25, you can > get your cheap proto PCBs also from China: > > http://dirtypcbs.com/I have a product which uses around 80% of 3 KLUT in a 100 QFP. The Lattice part in use is obsolete and I would like to have a replacement. So a 32 QFN is of no use in this app.> There are some oddities about the parts; are there really only 3 > flops per four LUTs? Anyone seen a patent?That is not unusual as you will find in some of the Lattice parts. Also note that more recent parts have grown the LUTs to 6 inputs which amounts to having 4 of the 4 input LUTs per FF.> Device | GW1N-1K | GW1N-9K > -------------+-----------+--------- > Lut | 1,152 | 8,640 > FF | 864 | 6,480 > CLU Array | 11x20 | > Dist. RAM | 0 | 17,280 > Block SRAM | 72Kb | 198Kb > NVM Bits [1] | 96K | 1,792K > Mult. 18x18 | 0 | 20 > Max User IO | 120 | 272 > PLLs+DLLs | 0 | 2+3 > WLCSP25 | 15 | > QFN32 | 21 | > LQFP100 | 79 | > LQFP144 | 116 | > MBGA160 | 120 | > UBGA204 | 120 | > PBGA204 | 120 | > PBGA256 | | 180 > PBGA484 | | 272 > > [1] Random Access > > Abbreviated from: > http://gowinsemi.com.cn/productsShow.aspx?n_id=353They seem to be following in the footsteps of the large FPGA makers, in particular Lattice. Any idea of what the various dimensions of the MBGA160 are? My problem with BGA is when the ball pitch gets too small that I have to drop from 6/6 design rules (maybe 5/5 these days). -- Rick
Reply by ●September 11, 20152015-09-11
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:> On 9/10/2015 5:13 AM, Jan-54 wrote:(snip)>> There are some oddities about the parts; are there really only 3 >> flops per four LUTs? Anyone seen a patent?> That is not unusual as you will find in some of the Lattice parts. Also > note that more recent parts have grown the LUTs to 6 inputs which > amounts to having 4 of the 4 input LUTs per FF.Someone should know the scaling laws for logic, which should show how the number of FF scales with LUTs, and how 4LUTs scale relative to 6LUTs. Note that a 6LUT isn't quite as useful as four 4LUTs. (Especially if you need a FF at an appropriate point.) Seems to me that FPGA designers are getting closer to what is actually used in the usual case, and optimizing more for that. -- glen
