The difference is, the OGD1 carries the cost of two very large and expensive FPGAs. A dumb frame buffer wouldn't require any programmable components; it could be all hardwired logic and a big block of fast RAM. That should make it a lot more affordable, for the applications where it's suitable.
Jack Carroll ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, December 7, 2012 10:56:42 PM Subject: Re: [Open-graphics] Open Framebuffer board It's funny because it's almost... like the OGD1 http://wiki.opengraphics.org/tiki-index.php?page=OGD1 but with only slightly lower specs. Le 2012-12-08 04:27, Jack Carroll a écrit : > In principle, this sounds reasonable. > > Jack Carroll > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dieter BSD" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Friday, December 7, 2012 8:15:42 PM > Subject: [Open-graphics] Open Framebuffer board > > Here is a summary of what I think we want in an open framebuffer > board: _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
