A couple of years ago we've done some Spartan II development with Xilinx ISE tools (V5.2.03i). Now we want to do a design with a Spartan III but our tools are out of date or have expired. We've tried the Webpack 8.1i on a 3GHz Prescott with 1GB of RAM and found it very slow. Hence my question: What is a good system setup for reasonable comfortable Spartan III development? What kind of PC do we need and which tools? We don't want to spend too much on tools since we do FPGA only occasionally, but if our engineer is spending most of his time waiting for his tools to finish a job we may be better of spending a bit more. Thanks, --DF
Spartan III development: which tools, what kind of PC?
Started by ●July 21, 2006
Reply by ●July 22, 20062006-07-22
Hi, Indeed, the latest version of ISE is very slow. Here is a list of things that I did to improve them. ->More RAM, If you are working on reasonably large projects 2GB of RAM would show considerable improvement ->RAID-0 for your installation directories and pagefiles and RAID-1 for project files. ->If you happened to have any antivirus programs running, by all means do disable them. ->Last but not least, you may want to try incremental synthesis on large projects. Ok, this may sound expensive but you may want to consider Intel Core 2(conroe) that will be available early august. Its nearly 200% faster than your current configuration. cheers, kishore. Deefoo wrote:> A couple of years ago we've done some Spartan II development with Xilinx ISE > tools (V5.2.03i). Now we want to do a design with a Spartan III but our > tools are out of date or have expired. We've tried the Webpack 8.1i on a > 3GHz Prescott with 1GB of RAM and found it very slow. Hence my question: > > What is a good system setup for reasonable comfortable Spartan III > development? What kind of PC do we need and which tools? > > We don't want to spend too much on tools since we do FPGA only occasionally, > but if our engineer is spending most of his time waiting for his tools to > finish a job we may be better of spending a bit more. > > Thanks, > --DF