On 5/24/05, Jack Carroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>         Thinking about internal vs. external DACs...  I find it hard to
> believe that a set of DACs resident on a chip full of logic can operate as
> cleanly as an external DAC.  For one thing, the lead frame inductance is
> pretty much guaranteed to cause pseudo-random bouncing as the various gates
> and registers shove charge around.  For another thing, a process optimized
> for logic probably isn't going to deliver the most accurate and
> fastest-settling analog switches, or the lowest-capacitance circuit nodes.
> Good analog processes tend to run at higher voltages than the latest and
> fastest CMOS can survive, I think.  So I tend to think some users will
> happily pay for state-of-the-art off-chip video DACs, and others won't.
>         Maybe when it comes time to design the second-generation boards
> implemented with ASICs, the DACs might be placed outboard to eliminate cable
> effects.  A DVI-to-analog external accessory might even become a product in
> its own right, usable with anybody's fast graphics board.
>         There might even be a board family down the road, with a larger
> outline than the regular one, that carries both the ASIC and one or two
> FPGAs to extend the logic itself.  That, too, could extend the production
> life of the first ASIC.

According to our senior ASIC designer, electrically isolating a DAC
inside of the ASIC is not a problem.  Apparently, the power can be
decoupled, and there are opportunities to add external caps to keep
the power rail smooth.  I agree that there could be greater
cross-talk, but I'm getting the impression that this will make the
difference between 300MHz and 350MHz, but I'm just guessing.

_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)

Reply via email to