The complexity of the simplest framebuffer board that CAN'T do CGA text is well beyond what we can fit into even a CPLD. We need a "medium small" FPGA for this. PCIe, memory access, and video raster scan are all complex systems.
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 11:02 PM, Jack Carroll <[email protected]> wrote: > 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) > -- Timothy Normand Miller, PhD Assistant Professor of Computer Science, Binghamton University http://www.cs.binghamton.edu/~millerti/<http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~millerti> Open Graphics Project
_______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
