Eric Smith schrieb:
> Rob wrote:
> Given how exotic the materials needed to fabricate these parts are, I expect that they
> will be priced too high for my budget.

The rumors must be true.
I asked my local distributor and they have not listed these parts.
Drawing from Spartan-2 and Spartan-3 experience this is a sure sign that
millions of pieces have been sold allready.

Kolja Sulimma

"Eric Smith" <eric@brouhaha.com> wrote in message 
news:qhk6951f3j.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
>
> Given how exotic the materials needed to fabricate these parts are, I 
> expect that they
> will be priced too high for my budget.
>
> Eric
>

As someone has gone and blabbed this into a public newsgroup, I can reveal 
that Googling for "The Endochronic Properties of Resublimated Thiotimoline" 
will reveal more about the materials used.
HTH, Syms. 

In article <qhk6951f3j.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>, Eric Smith
<eric@brouhaha.com> wrote:

> Rob wrote:
> > Aren't you and Xilinx developing a new line of FPGA's called "The Crystal 
> > Ball Series"?  Parallel psychic processing that transcends the sphere of 
> > phsyical science or knowledge.
> 
> So *that* is what that recent Xilinx patent on LUTs with negative 100 ps
> propogation delay
> is all about.  Daisy-chain enough of those, and you could really do some
> amazing things!

The problem is that they only work until you program them.

However, since software and firmware are usually very late, that means
that you can deliver when marketing has promised your product, and it
will be out of warantee by the time you deliver the code and it stops
working.

-- 
David M. Palmer  dmpalmer@email.com (formerly @clark.net, @ematic.com)

Rob wrote:
> Aren't you and Xilinx developing a new line of FPGA's called "The Crystal 
> Ball Series"?  Parallel psychic processing that transcends the sphere of 
> phsyical science or knowledge.

So *that* is what that recent Xilinx patent on LUTs with negative 100 ps propogation delay
is all about.  Daisy-chain enough of those, and you could really do some amazing things!

Given how exotic the materials needed to fabricate these parts are, I expect that they
will be priced too high for my budget.

Eric

harikris@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
>  I am targeting the design for XC2C512 coolrunner device. That's the
> biggest device i could find. Are you aware of any larger CPLD device?
> I have a dual-edge triggered clock i.e i have no other CPLD choice
> other than the coolrunner series.
>
>  I find that i am falling short of a dozen macrocell counts. The
> fitter report says it needs 524 macrocells and i have 512 macrocells
> available to me :-(
>
>  I have tried to optimize the design to my best possible knowledge (and
> my knowledge is not that profound).
>
> Can anybody here advise me on how to squeeze the design a LITTLE BIT
> more
> to make it fit into the XC2C512 device?
>
>  Thanks.

You can try turning on the ISE options optimize density, and exhaustive
fit.  The result is a design that uses fewer gates, etc, but runs
slower.  If you accidentally created latches, they will eat up chip
resources.

-Dave Pollum

Hi Lukats/Jim,

 Thanks for the sugggestions. I will work on those lines.
 I have not spent nearly a day thus far to try fit the design and your
comments seem to be encouraging.

 Thanks.

harikris@gmail.com wrote:

> Hi,
> 
>  I am targeting the design for XC2C512 coolrunner device. That's the
> biggest device i could find. Are you aware of any larger CPLD device?

There are plenty :
Lattice MachXO, Altera MAX II are the 'new designs' arena,
Lattice & Actel also have FLASH FPGAs, and lattice have older
CPLD families that are > 512 MCells, but their price/ability point
is probably not ideal these days.

> I have a dual-edge triggered clock i.e i have no other CPLD choice
> other than the coolrunner series.

See other threads, on how to create Dual Edge using two single edge 
FF+XOR. Plus, you can always clock double, or use a PLL.

> 
>  I find that i am falling short of a dozen macrocell counts. The
> fitter report says it needs 524 macrocells and i have 512 macrocells
> available to me :-(
> 
>  I have tried to optimize the design to my best possible knowledge (and
> my knowledge is not that profound).
> 
> Can anybody here advise me on how to squeeze the design a LITTLE BIT
> more to make it fit into the XC2C512 device?

  Scan thru the FIT RPT file, and look at your modules, for resource 
usage. Sometime it is easier to compile portions of the design, and
paste those summaries, then scan them with your eye and a pencil, for
ones that use more that their 'fair share' of resource.
  A small change in HDL coding can give a big change in resource.

-jg

"Kolja Sulimma" <news@sulimma.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
news:44550796$0$4514$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net...
> Rob schrieb:
>> Aren't you and Xilinx developing a new line of FPGA's called "The Crystal
>> Ball Series"?  Parallel psychic processing that transcends the sphere of
>> phsyical science or knowledge.
>
> How dare you write this in a newsgroup?
> I had to sign an NDA on that topic.
>
> Kolja Sulimma

is there an April joke somewhere? 'Crystal Ball' !?

Antti 

Rob schrieb:
> Aren't you and Xilinx developing a new line of FPGA's called "The Crystal 
> Ball Series"?  Parallel psychic processing that transcends the sphere of 
> phsyical science or knowledge.

How dare you write this in a newsgroup?
I had to sign an NDA on that topic.

Kolja Sulimma

<harikris@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
news:1146413671.605299.107260@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
>
> I am targeting the design for XC2C512 coolrunner device. That's the
> biggest device i could find. Are you aware of any larger CPLD device?
> I have a dual-edge triggered clock i.e i have no other CPLD choice
> other than the coolrunner series.
>
> I find that i am falling short of a dozen macrocell counts. The
> fitter report says it needs 524 macrocells and i have 512 macrocells
> available to me :-(
>
> I have tried to optimize the design to my best possible knowledge (and
> my knowledge is not that profound).
>
> Can anybody here advise me on how to squeeze the design a LITTLE BIT
> more
> to make it fit into the XC2C512 device?
>
> Thanks.
>
there are almost no generic rules, but specially for PLDs the design for PLD 
optimization
can yield in huge macrocell reduction.

if your current count is 524, then I would say with 99.9% that the desing 
can be made
fit into 512 unless you have already spent over one man-month in PLD 
specific optimization
to get the MC count down to 524.

the easiest way to find some resources is to find some block that are never 
active at same time
and use 1 extra MC to flag for resource sharing

as example if you need counter and shift register but not at the same time 
then almost all
MCs uses in counter and shift register could be shared.

besides that there are pretty many things for PLD that can influence the 
design fit, but again
no golden rule for you, its all design specific and based on general 'it 
doesnt fit' there is
little help that could be given to you

Antti