Xilinx vs Altera high-end solutions

Hello,

I am interested in opinions concerning advantages and disadvantages of the
hardware (FPGAs) and developing software (Quartus vs ISE) for high-end (very
demanding designs).
I was under the impression that xilinx was ahead but I've done some reading
lately and StratixII seems to have made a step ahead in comparison to
Virtex4. The devices I am interested in are Stratix and StratixII from one
side and VirtexII pro, Virtex4 one the other.

There is not one specific parameter that I need to investigate. Procesing
power, memory and I/O data rates are all significant.

Of cource the role of the EDA tools is important so if someone could give me
his opinion one advantages and week points of each one I would be grateful.

Thanks

Giorgos P. wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am interested in opinions concerning advantages and disadvantages
of the
> hardware (FPGAs) and developing software (Quartus vs ISE) for
high-end (very
> demanding designs).
> I was under the impression that xilinx was ahead but I've done some
reading
> lately and StratixII seems to have made a step ahead in comparison to
> Virtex4. The devices I am interested in are Stratix and StratixII
from one
> side and VirtexII pro, Virtex4 one the other.
>
> There is not one specific parameter that I need to investigate.
Procesing
> power, memory and I/O data rates are all significant.
>
> Of cource the role of the EDA tools is important so if someone could
give me
> his opinion one advantages and week points of each one I would be
grateful.

Howdy Giorgos,

   Asking such generic questions are bound to either get you generic
answers, or FUD from the vendors.  The short answer is that after
availability, quantity, price, and features are all factored in, each
has its own strengths and weaknesses, yet each is also a capable FPGA.
For some things, Stratix II will be fastest, other things Virtex-4 will
be fastest, and a few others, VirtexII-Pro will be fastest.

Without a fair amount of detail on the "specific parameters" of your
design, it is impossible to guess which might match up best.  Or beter
yet, get the tools for both and try targetting your design to each.

Good luck,

   Marc

Giorgos P. wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I am interested in opinions concerning advantages and disadvantages of the
> hardware (FPGAs) and developing software (Quartus vs ISE) for high-end
> (very demandidownload).
> I was under the impression that xilinx was ahead but I've done some
> readindesigns and StratixII seems to have made a step ahead in comparison
> to Virtex4. The devices I am interested in are Stratix and StratixII from
> one side and VirtexII pro, Virtex4 one the other.
> 
> There is not one specific parameter that I need to investigate. Procesing
> power, memory and I/O data rates are all significant.
> 
> Of cource the role of the EDA tools is important so if someone could give
> me his opinion one advantages and week points of each one I would be
> grateful.
> 
> Thanks


You are asking for a holy war !

Both Altera and Xilinx make FPGAs. Som epeople like A, others
like X. If you just go by marketing numbers, you will never be
able to decide which one is better. When we had to make the
choice, we downloaded the free tools, and tried a bunch of
designs (you can download various sample designs from
OpenCores.org if you need some).

1) Try both (free tools), look at the sample results
2) Look at the ease of use of tools
3) Look at support (do a search in this group for answers from
   X and A, perhaps thats not a fair comparison as there are
   alot more X users here than A users)
4) Make your own decission

Shouldn't be that difficult.

Regards,
rudi
=============================================================
Rudolf Usselmann,  ASICS World Services,  http://www.asics.ws
Your Partner for IP Cores, Design, Verification and Synthesis

> 1) Try both (free tools), look at the sample results

Just a quick note -- be sure to use real-world designs and push the
tools on performance.  Using "toy" designs (say, a 32-bit adder or a
4-bit multiply) often doesn't give you the full story.

> 3) Look at support (do a search in this group for answers from
>    X and A, perhaps thats not a fair comparison as there are
>    alot more X users here than A users)

If you plan to buy any volume, then this group will not be a good
example of support.  Both companies will fall overthemselves for your
business if you are buying any quantity.  There are distributor FAEs,
factory FAEs, and others who will hold your hand and give you a
back-rub if it helps you be successful with their product!

If you are serious about buying high-end products, your best bet is to
try out the tools and invite salespeople/FAEs from both companies in to
compete for your business.

Oh yeah -- pick Altera ;-)

Regards,

Paul

Giorgos P. wrote:

> I am interested in opinions concerning advantages and disadvantages of the
> hardware (FPGAs) and developing software (Quartus vs ISE) for high-end (very
> demanding designs).

Consider deferring the vendor and part selection until after you
have prototyped and simulated a substantial portion
of your design in vendor-agnostic hdl. Use synthesis
to pick a device from each vendor and then get quotes.

         -- Mike Treseler

Mike,

Sounds good, but I believe it doesn't work that way.

If you know you are going to use part A, or part X, you will then use 
the powerful built in features that each vendor offers.

For example, Xilinx SRL16's are great for many DSP and signal processing 
tasks.  The Xilinx/IBM PPC are also very useful.  Many of these features 
define an architecture.  Altera has a similar portfolio.

Pick a generic HDL, and code without regard for these special features, 
and then you are at the mercy of the HDL compiler to somehow find the 
best structures in each FPGA.

For high end designs, you will have to take advantage of the 
manufacturer's device specific feature set to get the performance you 
want for the least cost (smallest) and fastest device/design.

Austin

Mike Treseler wrote:
> Giorgos P. wrote:
> 
>> I am interested in opinions concerning advantages and disadvantages of 
>> the
>> hardware (FPGAs) and developing software (Quartus vs ISE) for high-end 
>> (very
>> demanding designs).
> 
> 
> Consider deferring the vendor and part selection until after you
> have prototyped and simulated a substantial portion
> of your design in vendor-agnostic hdl. Use synthesis
> to pick a device from each vendor and then get quotes.
> 
>         -- Mike Treseler

> Consider deferring the vendor and part selection until after you
> have prototyped and simulated a substantial portion
> of your design in vendor-agnostic hdl. Use synthesis
> to pick a device from each vendor and then get quotes.

Good advice.  But be sure to use the post P&R performance and
logic-utlization results to select a device.  Synthesis estimates are
less accurate and while they can be pretty good on average, for any
given design could be far off the mark.  Also, register packing
(grouping logic & registers) for Altera devices happens in the P&R
flow, which will substantially reduce your logic requirement.

Regards,

Paul Leventis
Altera Corp.

Austin Lesea wrote:
> Mike,
> 
> Sounds good, but I believe it doesn't work that way.

It does for me.

> If you know you are going to use part A, or part X, you will then use 
> the powerful built in features that each vendor offers.

Many do, but I don't.
If the feature can't be inferred from code
for both vendors, I'd rather not use it.

         -- Mike Treseler

Paul Leventis wrote:

> Good advice.  But be sure to use the post P&R performance and
> logic-utlization results to select a device.

I agree. I run both place and routes from time to time
to make sure I am on track.

      -- Mike Treseler

I thought more often than not it would be largely decided by past
experience of your EEs on the project  since the A v X varies over time
as new parts are released. Have you asked your group members what they
prefered?

regards

johnjakson at usa dot com