6502.org Forum  Projects  Code  Documents  Tools  Forum
It is currently Fri Nov 22, 2024 10:13 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Nov 21, 2012 6:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:27 pm
Posts: 3258
Location: NC, USA
Xilinx is great, but everyone needs a 'number 2'.
My limited experience tells me Xilinx is top-notch when it comes to software development for their FPGA/CPLD's. However, the one thing that turns me off about them is their commitment to BGA style packaging for all their newest devices.

On the other hand, it seems Actel's newest devices are present on 144-pin and 208-pin QFP's.
I've been looking at one of their flagship SoC'sActel. Checking their flagship ProAsic3 FPGA's leads to similar features. Digikey has the 208-pin for $71ea...
Some intriguing features of their flagship SoC:
100-MHz/32-kHz on board oscillators,
analog front end,
100MHz 32-bit ARM CPU,
largest devices available in 144-pin QFP & 208-pin QFP.

Anyone have experience with their development software? It appears to be free...

_________________
65Org16:https://github.com/ElEctric-EyE/verilog-6502


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 21, 2012 7:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:00 am
Posts: 2353
Location: Gouda, The Netherlands
Note that the ARM is a soft core, so it will eat plenty of resources. Also, their dual port SRAM is rather small compared to Xilinx. Even their biggest device only has 144 Kb of dual port RAM, while the smallest Spartan 6 has 216 Kb, and the XC6SLX9 we're using has 576 Kb.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 21, 2012 4:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:27 pm
Posts: 3258
Location: NC, USA
Actel's A3PE3000, E-series ProAsic3, has 504kbits of DP SRAM...
Also, Actels' FPGA's retain programming, so no PROM needed. This can be a plus and a negative, as multiple PROM's can extend flexibility of one Xilinx FPGA.
But PROM's are expensive and their FPGA takes some time (<1 second for XC6SLX9) to be programmed upon power-up.







EDIT: (11/22/12) Clarified

_________________
65Org16:https://github.com/ElEctric-EyE/verilog-6502


Last edited by ElEctric_EyE on Thu Nov 22, 2012 7:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 21, 2012 4:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:00 am
Posts: 2353
Location: Gouda, The Netherlands
ElEctric_EyE wrote:
But PROM's are expensive and the FPGA takes some time to be programmed upon power-up.

The Spartan 6 will also work with common serial flash chips. These are cheaper. It still takes time to load, though.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 21, 2012 5:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:27 pm
Posts: 3258
Location: NC, USA
I went and did some research and started this thread because of what I'd read yesterday in the doc's for the ORSOC Graphics Accelerator project on Github, that it was made for the Actel 1500E device. I had commented earlier in another thread about another person who has his version (maybe the creator) on opencores.org. And that this ORSOC project had no chance of fitting in a QFP Spartan 6. It was made for a Spartan 6 on an ATLAS board. This is a "Xilinx SpartanĀ®-6 LX45 FPGA in a 324-pin BGA package"... The key here being the Actel 1500E and even the larger 3000E FPGA's are available in a 208-pin QFP package, unlike a comparable Spartan 6. Although these Actel FPGA's appear to have 3-input LUTs as their basic structure, compared to the Spartan 6's 6-input LUT.

_________________
65Org16:https://github.com/ElEctric-EyE/verilog-6502


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2012 4:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 10:15 pm
Posts: 904
I haven't used Actel in a few years, but remember thinking it was REALLY slow to download even simple configurations. After switching to Xilinx I found the Xilinx larger building blocks more sensible, leading to fewer layers of logic. Shift registers, RAMS and register files are a natural fit for Xilinx and painful to implement in Actel FPGAs.

_________________
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. ...Jan van de Snepscheut


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: