John Griessen wrote:
James Richard Tyrer wrote:
Still wonder where this is going.
Is the objective to produce a board to be used? or to produce an open
core for VGA.
From: http://wacco.mveas.com/index.php?entry=24
Michael M. says, "The point of this project is to get development
/started/ on a usable platform,
not to be an /end product/ as a video card. We're certainly aiming for
3D support and all the
other graphic spectacular stuff (shaders and whatnot)
but that might not come until version 2 or 3 of this card."
So his objective is an open core in FPGA for development of other cores.
The design has a reprogrammable FPGA and a CPLD as OCD1 does.
I'm interested in supplying the assembled open hardware
boards as a cottage industry, once enough people want them.
If I made a cost reducing version of his layout, it would be published
with the TAPR open hardware license, a GPL-like hardware license that
asks users
to share their revisions. Michael seems close to testing his design, so
we'll
get an idea soon how many buyers there might be. I'm hoping some more
will see
this thread on Monday -- there's not enough interest to prepay a batch
of twenty yet...
OK, then lets consider why we don't just use a Rage XL chip.
1. Dot clock too slow.
2. Memory isn't DDR or DDR2
3. Memory size is too small.
4. It won't do new larger formats.
These would all seem simple to fix when designing a new chip.
And we would need a way to read/write the video memory through a bus
arbitrator.
Other possible considerations:
1. Hardware compositor.
--
JRT
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
