Timothy Normand Miller wrote:
On 2/20/07, Koen De Vleeschauwer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 09:36:00AM -0500, Timothy Normand Miller wrote:
> I think it'll be a tight squeeze, but I have evidence to suggest that
> a simple, fixed-function 3D GPU will fit into that FPGA.
While OGD1 doesn't need more than a xc3s4000, it might be interesting
for Traversal to have a single OGD1 outfitted with a xc3s5000, as an
insurance policy in case final design is somewhat bigger than planned.
Don't fret. We definitely have plans to do that. I'm unsure whether
or not we should sell a board variant. We should make the price
difference great enough that people won't feel underpriviledged to get
the 4000 model. The difference would have to be more than the
difference between the part cost of the 4000 and 5000, for both
practical (low volume product) and psychological/marketing reasons.
Actually, it's a common marketing tactic to have 3 models of
something. People feel better than if they got the low-end model but
didn't pay as much as the high-end model. What should we remove from
OGD1 to make a low-end model?
make it a 2D video controller for servers, with extra fast blitting for
graphics mode console ;D
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
