Lattice Announces EOL for XP and EC/P Product Lines

On 8/1/2013 3:21 AM, Svenn Are Bjerkem wrote:
> kl. 00:54:41 UTC+2 wednesday 31. july 2013 rickman wrote:
>> In fact, I'm skipping Altera for the moment and skipping over to
>> MicroSemi and Cypress to see if their combination CPU/Logic devices
>> might do the job well and let me eliminate the stereo CODEC to (another
>> part that could go obsolete at any time).  I seem to recall that the
>> Cypress part might be just the ticket but the MicroSemi part runs some
>> $50 at the low point.  The current Lattice part is running under $10.
>
> We've got a quote for the Microsemi SF2 M2S010 (without T) somewhere in the middle of that price difference in low volume. The features of SF2 somehow justified the additional price because we could avoid a separate flash and MCU externally. The flexibility in configuration of the FPGA and MSS and hard preipherals also give us design freedom. Low power consumption was definitively something worth a bit extra.

I had a chance to look at the Smart Fusion 2 devices, and they seem to 
be too much device for this project.  The M2S005 would likely be a good 
fit with a lot more logic than needed, but the smallest package it comes 
in is a fine pitch BGA with 400 pins!  I guess they are targeting much 
larger apps than mine.

I still need to take a better look at the Cypress parts if I can figure 
out how to get a data sheet.

-- 

Rick

Rick,

It seems to me that you have changed your goals around a bit and it is not =
clear to me exactly what you are looking for anymore but from what I can ga=
ther I still think you are missing out on a decent choice if you are ignori=
ng the actel/microsemi igloo parts.  Take another look at the agl250 line. =
 If you need the smaller quad flat pack it is there, I would imagine there =
is plenty of logic for your existing product and it is inexpensive.  They h=
ave a chip in the same package with a cortex m1 if you want an embedded uC =
too.

I personally prefer to design with Xilinx first then altera then actel but =
will definitely go with actel when the design needs it, they just tend to r=
un a bit slower than what I like.  I have looked at using the cypress chips=
 before for the USB capability back around 2005 but was not able to get the=
 windows side working right with the jungo driver so went with the USB to u=
art parts from ftdi instead.  Never looked back to cypress or jungo since t=
hen.

On 8/4/2013 4:09 PM, Chris wrote:
> Rick,
>
> It seems to me that you have changed your goals around a bit and it is not clear to me exactly what you are looking for anymore but from what I can gather I still think you are missing out on a decent choice if you are ignoring the actel/microsemi igloo parts.  Take another look at the agl250 line.  If you need the smaller quad flat pack it is there, I would imagine there is plenty of logic for your existing product and it is inexpensive.  They have a chip in the same package with a cortex m1 if you want an embedded uC too.

The goal is to live a rich, full life... ;)  There are any number of 
ways to do that.

I have gone through all the major FPGA makers, including MicroSemi and 
created a spread sheet of the devices which might substitute for the 
Lattice part that has been discontinued.  I may have given the Igloo 
parts short shrift because I seem to recall they use Versa tiles for 
both logic an FFs, so you need twice as many if you need both FFs and 4 
input LUTs.  The Lattice FPGA being replaced has some 3000 LUTs and 3000 
FFs, IIRC so the AGLN250 might suit the requirement.  It would be nicer 
if the new device offered some new capability such as more logic and/or 
multipliers.  So I should at least include this part in my selection 
even if it does not provide any new capabilities.


> I personally prefer to design with Xilinx first then altera then actel but will definitely go with actel when the design needs it, they just tend to run a bit slower than what I like.  I have looked at using the cypress chips before for the USB capability back around 2005 but was not able to get the windows side working right with the jungo driver so went with the USB to uart parts from ftdi instead.  Never looked back to cypress or jungo since then.

As to my seeming switching of requirements, we *have* to replace the 
FPGA.  There is also a CODEC from AKM on the board which could be hard 
to replace should it also go obsolete.  It is just as old as the FPGA 
and I have no insight about when AKM might obsolete it.  Everything else 
on the board is second sourced.  So if we are building a new model, I 
want to have a plan for providing some assurance the CODEC won't cause 
another redesign in a couple of years.

One way of doing this is to combine the CODEC function with the FPGA 
(hence looking at the Microsemi MCU/FPGA device which turns out to be 
rather pricey) or possibly use an MCU (with adequate analog I/O) and a 
smaller FPGA.  Only a portion of the current FPGA design has to be in an 
FPGA, most of it is slow logic can be turned into software.

SiLabs seems to make an 8051 type chip with 16 bit ADCs and fast 12 bit 
DACs.  I might be able to dither the DACs to provide higher resolution 
on the output.  I need to also look at Cirrus Logic.  I seem to recall 
they make some parts that might work.  Its hard because of the limited 
board space, but two smaller devices might actually take up less board 
space than one large one.  Providing a 5 volt tolerant interface would 
also eliminate some other chips and free up more board space.

Both ADI and TI have DSP/CODEC devices, but they aren't designed for 
general purpose programming and just don't suit the need.

-- 

Rick

Well I am jealous that sounds like a fun project.  One other thing that cam=
e to mind as this was going through my head today was the fpslic from atmel=
, we looked at using one a while back but ultimately decided on splitting t=
he design into a cpld (coolrunner) and an atmega128.

Best of luck and let me know what you decide on, it is interesting to me.

On 8/5/2013 12:42 AM, Chris wrote:
> Well I am jealous that sounds like a fun project.  One other thing that came to mind as this was going through my head today was the fpslic from atmel, we looked at using one a while back but ultimately decided on splitting the design into a cpld (coolrunner) and an atmega128.
>
> Best of luck and let me know what you decide on, it is interesting to me.

Wow!  I had no idea they still made the FPSLIC.  That is *very* long in 
the tooth and I believe it never had much market penetration so that I 
expect many potential users were put off thinking it would be scrapped. 
  Actually, if we had any assurance that would be made for the next 5-10 
years, it likely could be a perfect fit.  IIRC it had an AVR CPU and 
some amount of the LUT based Atmel FPGA fabric.  That would do a great 
job of offloading the FPGA fabric with the AVR and likely is 5 volt 
compatible so potentially saving some chips.  But I'm pretty sure this 
is not well supported and likely to be dumped any time.  It's what, at 
least 10 years old, maybe 15.

Heck, if the sky were the limit, I think this design could be done in 
the GA144, a multiprocessor chip which I think is more like an FPGA with 
processors in place of LUTs (I call it a FPPA, Field Programmable 
Processor Array).  But the company making them is very small and I doubt 
they will be around in five years.

As to the "fun" aspect, yes, it is a bit of fun, but this is not a 
salaried job, this is my *business*, so the seriousness takes away a lot 
of the "fun".  I need to impress the customer that I can give them a new 
design that will last for at least 5 years and I would like to provide 
them potential for new applications.

-- 

Rick

On 7/31/2013 7:48 PM, Chris wrote:
> Rick... I check the Actel/Microsemi lead you started down on the original post, they have options available in your target size, 100 pin QFP, are flash based/reprogrammable over JTAG and I think should have very similar power requirements to your original design.  I am looking at this chip, available today on digikey: AGL250V2-VQG100, 14 mm2, $25.40, 68 I/O and a fair amount of logic.  If you don't need that much logic and want a cheaper part they go down from there in the same package.

Ok, I finally figured it out.  Sometimes I am a little slow.  The AGL 
parts are just Igloo which is combined on a web page with the IGLOOe 
parts.  The link said IGLOO/e which made me think it was just the e 
parts with the ARM M1 core enabled and I kept skipping that one.

Still, I find the parts to be a bit confusing.  I'm not certain what the 
difference between the IGLOO and the IGLOOnano is.  It appears the nano 
is slightly lower power, but I don't see just how much lower.  The IGLOO 
parts seem to come in an M1 version even without the 'e'.  In fact the 
lowest cost part in the AGL250 flavor (RoHS) is the M1 version!  Not 
sure just what that even means.

I think my main concern is that these parts are long in the tooth, but 
I'll add them to my spread sheet since they are the only ones that can 
fit the board without adding parts or going to a much tougher footprint 
to use.

-- 

Rick

On Wednesday, July 31, 2013 6:37:21 AM UTC+12, rickman wrote:
>It has 3000 LUTs which are around 80% used and the internal 
> configuration Flash saves space on the tiny, cramped board.
> 
> Mostly the alternatives are other Lattice devices, but none are a 
 >perfect fit.  XP2, XO2 and the iCE40 line.  The ones that come in the 
> same package don't have as many LUTs, only 2100 which would require 
> using a soft CPU to implement the slow functions in fewer LUTs. 

Someone mentioned Altera has a new family coming shortly, above the MAX V, which is looking backward next to Lattice.
So you could push them for more info on what packages/sizes they plan ?

-jg

On 8/11/2013 4:53 AM, jg wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 31, 2013 6:37:21 AM UTC+12, rickman wrote:
>> It has 3000 LUTs which are around 80% used and the internal
>> configuration Flash saves space on the tiny, cramped board.
>>
>> Mostly the alternatives are other Lattice devices, but none are a
>   >perfect fit.  XP2, XO2 and the iCE40 line.  The ones that come in the
>> same package don't have as many LUTs, only 2100 which would require
>> using a soft CPU to implement the slow functions in fewer LUTs.
>
> Someone mentioned Altera has a new family coming shortly, above the MAX V, which is looking backward next to Lattice.
> So you could push them for more info on what packages/sizes they plan ?

Funny, I shot an email to my favorite distie and I was eventually 
connected with an FAE.  He is new to the company and indicated he would 
be digging up an NDA to sign.  I was a bit puzzled by this, it has been 
a while since I was asked to sign an NDA to hear about new products.  I 
didn't hear back after a few days I called him.  He was rather surprised 
I was asking about the new line and asked how I even knew about it.  I 
told him I didn't know much other than it was a follow on to the Max V 
and was pretty new.  Seems it is so new that Altera hasn't spoken about 
it other than under NDA, lol.

What I did get out of him was that currently they are pushing out a new 
Stradix line IIRC and that would occupy them for most of 2014.  If they 
wouldn't have the Max V follow on in production until 2015 that is a bit 
long for me to hold my breath.  So I'm moving on... and I guess we 
aren't doing the NDA... that's what I am required to say, lol

But at least Altera hasn't abandoned the Flash based logic area like 
Xilinx.  I like Lattice, but I'd hate for them to be the last man 
standing in Flash FPGAs, well, other than MicroSemi assuming you count 
them as being in the FPGA business.  Just kidding... ;)

-- 

Rick

Rick,

You might add MicroSemi Igloo2 to your list as well. A SmartFusion2 without the ARM, but still has the other hard-silicon interfaces.

Andy

On 8/22/2013 12:09 PM, jonesandy@comcast.net wrote:
> Rick,
>
> You might add MicroSemi Igloo2 to your list as well. A SmartFusion2 without the ARM, but still has the other hard-silicon interfaces.

Yes, I've taken a look at the MicroSemi parts, but they suffer the same 
problems as the others.  The favorable 100 pin QFP is not used in the 
Igloo2 line and the Igloo line is rather long in the tooth.  It also is 
hard to get now, I see very little inventory at Digikey and a lead time 
query says "Unable to get lead time".

If the prices on the SmartFusion lines weren't so high I'd consider 
them, but they are pretty high for this design and they only come in 
rather large packages.

-- 

Rick