On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:38:17 -0800, Jeff Carr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Peter TB Brett wrote: > > Hi there, > > > > I noticed with interest that you're intending to use a Spartan-3 XC3S2000, > > as I'm currently working on a design that uses the XC3S1500. > > > > I couldn't find any record of the decisions that lead to the choice of > > that particular component, but can I suggest that you design the board for > > the FG900 footprint? That way if you find you really can't fit the > > firmware into the XC3S2000 logic space, you could drop one of the larger > > devices in instead without having to redesign the PCB... > > That would be wise; and probably wouldn't add to the cost. > > I assume the reason to use the Spartan line vs the new Virtex-4 is cost? > Perhaps the Virtex chip could handle doing PCI itself and that would > save on the cost of the extra PCI part with the Sparten chip.
Yes. Now that the primary product will be in ASIC form, the choice of FPGA is less important, although it's not entirely a non-issue, because it will still affect the price of the prototypes. Furthermore, die-area is still a factor in the cost of the ASIC. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
