10 slices is nothing compare to the fixed point multiplier in an asic
design. Maybe this could a design optimisation, the day you need to
find some free slice, to remove this stage for few unit.

2008/2/5, André Pouliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Kenneth Ostby wrote:
> > Just my $.02
> >
> > Timothy Normand Miller:
> >
> >> Yeah, those are hard to see.  I'm guessing that the major impact is
> >> coordinates.  I suggest that we have two multipliers.  One with
> >> rounding for those cases where we need it for coordinates.  And one
> >> without rounding, mostly for colors.
> >>
> >
> > Having two different multipliers for colors and coordinates seems like a
> > solution that could bite us in the behind if we have to update them
> > later.
> >
> > An interesting point would be how much we're actually gaining/loosing
> > from adding a 4th step to the multiplyer? Seing how it should be
> > possible to pipeline it, we shouldn't have to sacrifice a lot of
> > performance to gain accuracy?
> >
> >
> >
> Well it would add a fifth stage to the multiplier.  That added stage
> would take something like 10 more slice in the design. Not that much but
> we are already taking 35 slice and 1 multiplier. It's rather small if
> you consider that we are having like 28K slice and 96 multiplier in the
> spartan3-4000.
>
> The question is still how much space do we need for the full design? If
> we have the space it's not that long to add that stage later in the
> design, it would take something like 2 hour with basic simulation of the
> multiplier for design correctness.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Open-graphics mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
> List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
>
_______________________________________________
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