Which Altera to buy?

On 03/12/14 13:43, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> David,
> 
> Jesus loves you. And I love you. Seek Him.
> 
> Best regards,
> Rick C. Hodgin
> 

Does that mean you agree with what I wrote?  Or that you disagree?  Or
that you don't understand it?  Or that you just don't want to think
about it?

David,

You are always writing posts to guide me in my
endeavors. It is a good sentiment, and I wanted
to do likewise.

Your skills and knowledge are a great asset. Use
them wisely.

Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin

rickman wrote:


> I can't seem to find it now, but someone recently posted a link to
> price/LUT vs size data in graph form.  It gets a bit crowded at the
> bottom end, but appears to show there is no real price difference
> between the two brands.  The data does include a very small number of
> other devices than X and A, but not enough to be useful.
> 
> In fact it is interesting that the prices get very crowded at the low
> end jamming up the graph.  I suggested that he present the data with a
> logarithmic Y axis or even in log-log form.  Clearly competitive market
> forces at work.
> 
The "low end" is where I live!  So, I don't know about those $18,000
FPGAs, or who the heck USES them.

I know that in very small quantities, the Xilinx XC3S50A is down to
$6.12!  This is pretty amazing!  The non-volatile version of the
part (XC3S50AN) is $9.91.

These prices have actually come DOWN sometime this year!  I have no idea
what an equivalent Altera part would cost, due to the apples vs. oranges
of different internal architecture.

Jon

rickman wrote:


> I can't seem to find it now, but someone recently posted a link to
> price/LUT vs size data in graph form.  It gets a bit crowded at the
> bottom end, but appears to show there is no real price difference
> between the two brands.  The data does include a very small number of
> other devices than X and A, but not enough to be useful.
> 
> In fact it is interesting that the prices get very crowded at the low
> end jamming up the graph.  I suggested that he present the data with a
> logarithmic Y axis or even in log-log form.  Clearly competitive market
> forces at work.
> 
Spartan 3 is not included in the chart.  In the log-log version
(THANKS, Theo!) it is clear that the Spartan 6 does VERY well against
most other types in the price/LUT.

And, Virtex 5 is just about the WORST!

You can't compare Spartan 3 vs. Spartan 6 due to the significant changes
in the LUT capacity, unless you have some kind of correction factor
to apply.  I have NO IDEA how one would establish such a factor, though!

Jon

Jon Elson wrote:
> rickman wrote:
> 
> 
>> I can't seem to find it now, but someone recently posted a link to
>> price/LUT vs size data in graph form.  It gets a bit crowded at the
>> bottom end, but appears to show there is no real price difference
>> between the two brands.  The data does include a very small number of
>> other devices than X and A, but not enough to be useful.
>>
>> In fact it is interesting that the prices get very crowded at the low
>> end jamming up the graph.  I suggested that he present the data with a
>> logarithmic Y axis or even in log-log form.  Clearly competitive market
>> forces at work.
>>
> Spartan 3 is not included in the chart.  In the log-log version
> (THANKS, Theo!) it is clear that the Spartan 6 does VERY well against
> most other types in the price/LUT.
> 
> And, Virtex 5 is just about the WORST!
> 
> You can't compare Spartan 3 vs. Spartan 6 due to the significant changes
> in the LUT capacity, unless you have some kind of correction factor
> to apply.  I have NO IDEA how one would establish such a factor, though!
> 
> Jon

Sometime recently we went out for quotes on Spartan 6 and Artix 7 parts
looking for the best price for a part with 4 GTP transceivers.  The
Artix-7 won that race, but the parts with fewer than 100K LE are
still hard to get.  The smallest Artix 7 (and possibly cheapest
Xilinx FPGA) is the XC7A15T, which is only supported by the latest
Vivado release and looks to be 15-18 weeks out.

-- 
Gabor

Note that quite a few of the more expensive Altera eval boards ship with a
"free" design tools DVD. The problem is, to actually use those design tools
you need a license which is most definitely not free (possibly several
times more expensive than the board itself)	   
					
---------------------------------------		
Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com

On Wednesday, December 3, 2014 2:01:17 PM UTC-6, Jon Elson wrote:
> rickman wrote:
> 
> 
> > I can't seem to find it now, but someone recently posted a link to
> > price/LUT vs size data in graph form.  It gets a bit crowded at the
> > bottom end, but appears to show there is no real price difference
> > between the two brands.  The data does include a very small number of
> > other devices than X and A, but not enough to be useful.
> > 
> > In fact it is interesting that the prices get very crowded at the low
> > end jamming up the graph.  I suggested that he present the data with a
> > logarithmic Y axis or even in log-log form.  Clearly competitive market
> > forces at work.
> > 
> Spartan 3 is not included in the chart.  In the log-log version
> (THANKS, Theo!) it is clear that the Spartan 6 does VERY well against
> most other types in the price/LUT.
> 
> And, Virtex 5 is just about the WORST!
> 
> You can't compare Spartan 3 vs. Spartan 6 due to the significant changes
> in the LUT capacity, unless you have some kind of correction factor
> to apply.  I have NO IDEA how one would establish such a factor, though!
> 
> Jon

Ran a number of opcores.org processor designs on Spartan 3&6, Kintex-7, Cyclone 2&4 and Arria II.  ("http://opencores.org/project,up_core_list,downloads" pull "family comparison; numbers below are from a more recent version)

The LUT count averages are:
S-3:         1.46 4LUTs to one ALUT
S-6 & K-7:   1.05 6LUTs to one ALUT
C-2 & C-4:   1.58 4LUTs to one ALUT
So roughly 1.5 4LUTs per 6LUT or ALUT.

Fmax generally scales with process node

(altor32, atlas_2K-base, eco32, leros, m1_core, mblite, navre, next186, pic16c5x, pdp11-34verilob, risc5, t65 & tv80; typically 1K to 4K LUT designs)

I ended up ordering this board:
    http://www.terasic.com.tw/cgi-bin/page/archive.pl?Language=English&CategoryNo=167&No=830

I was informed in email today I should receive it early next week.

I'm going to spend some time getting communication working between the
FPGA and the host computer as a debugging feature of the Oppie-1 CPU.
I will modify my Oppie-1 Debugger to receive the debug data from the
live device and display it in execution as it goes, or step-by-step,
as it does presently in the simulation.

I will also be able to send/receive updates to memory locations, change
register values, reset, restart, a true remote debugging app.

Then ... on to Oppie-2.

-----
If anyone has advice on how to get communication running most easily
on this board, I would appreciate it.  Thank you in advance.

Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin

On 12/4/2014 12:25 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> I ended up ordering this board:
>      http://www.terasic.com.tw/cgi-bin/page/archive.pl?Language=English&CategoryNo=167&No=830
>
> I was informed in email today I should receive it early next week.
>
> I'm going to spend some time getting communication working between the
> FPGA and the host computer as a debugging feature of the Oppie-1 CPU.
> I will modify my Oppie-1 Debugger to receive the debug data from the
> live device and display it in execution as it goes, or step-by-step,
> as it does presently in the simulation.
>
> I will also be able to send/receive updates to memory locations, change
> register values, reset, restart, a true remote debugging app.
>
> Then ... on to Oppie-2.
>
> -----
> If anyone has advice on how to get communication running most easily
> on this board, I would appreciate it.  Thank you in advance.

Doesn't look like you have a lot of options on this board.  UART serial 
to USB is the one comms choice.  I thought you were going to use 
Ethernet.  That seems to be another $250, wow, more than the FPGA board. 
  I guess you can add one via the Arduino interface for next to nothing.

-- 

Rick

On Thursday, December 4, 2014 5:28:25 PM UTC-5, rickman wrote:
> On 12/4/2014 12:25 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> > I ended up ordering this board:
> >     http://www.terasic.com.tw/cgi-bin/page/archive.pl?Language=English&CategoryNo=167&No=830
> >
> > If anyone has advice on how to get communication running most easily
> > on this board, I would appreciate it.  Thank you in advance.
> 
> Doesn't look like you have a lot of options on this board.  UART serial 
> to USB is the one comms choice.  I thought you were going to use 
> Ethernet.

I plan to.  I won't receive the PHY board I bought until the end of
December though.  If there's another option I'll use that in the time
in-between, and possible after that.

I have one of the Silicon Labs chips arriving this week, but I'll need
to get a converter from its TQFP48 form factor to something usable by
human beings. I may go ahead and do that anyway.  The Silicon Labs API
is very clean and straight-forward.

    http://www.silabs.com/products/interface/ethernetcontrollers/Pages/default.aspx

> That seems to be another $250, wow, more than the FPGA board. 
> I guess you can add one via the Arduino interface for next to
> nothing.

Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin