I'm not debating any improvements or drawbacks the Etrax FS would have compared
to the LX; I'm simply stating that it would require a new board with a
different schematics and different layout.
And the USB on the FS is still 1.1 only so I don't think you'd be splitting
480Mb/s.
Dave
"Roberto A. Foglietta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Having two Ethernets sounds very interesting while having 1 usb ports
does not hurts because passive usb hub could divide energy and data
band between small usb peripheral while self alimented usb hub could
supply other needs. Dividing data throughput of 480Mbit/s per 4 is
still reasonable.
2007/11/14, Dave Van den Eynde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> The Etrax FS is a different chip: it only has 1 USB but 2 ethernet ports, so
> that would require a new board alltogether. Also, I don't think they are pin
> compatible.
>
> Axis makes a board for the Etrax FS, and if you want a board with an ARM
> chip, there's plenty of vendors there as well. But they target different
> embedded markets.
>
> Dave
>
>
> sigle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Is it possible change in the Foxboard 100 Mhz Etrax 100LX --> 200 Mhz Etrax
> FX?
>
> In the first foxboards was CPU, RAM and ROM in the same chip (etrax 100LX
> MCM 4+16).
> Then they put CPU and memory separately - cpu (etrax 100lx) and separately
> ROM 8 MB + RAM 32 MB.
> Next step may be faster processor etrax FX in the foxboard - why someone
> dont made such system (200 Mhz etrax FX + separately 8MB RAM + separately 32
> MB RAM = all in the foxboard).
>
> The same is with ARM processors: 60 Mhz ARM7 have RAM + ROM in the chip
> (philips, cirrus, etc), but 200 MHZ ARM9 have no RAM and ROM in the chip
> (philips, cirrus, etc) :(
>
>
> ------------------------------
> New York Times: Vene mõjuvõim Baltikumis suureneb
> Loe lähemalt Eesti Päevaleht Online'ist: www.epl.ee/artikkel/407508
>
>
--
/roberto
