Oddly enough, a preliminary glance at their datasheet suggests that they crammed everything but the kitchen-sink into the FT2232H, yet weren't able to squeeze out any better performance from the built-in-FIFO, which is a VERY convenient interface, aside from the fact that the FIFO is far too shallow. Their FT245M (?) was capable of up to 10 MBytes/second, but their new version in this chip is no more capable, rate-wise.

USB, unfortunately "comes and goes" with the PC often "going away" from the interface for as much as half a minute, or perhaps more, which will then require one provide a target-local FIFO capable of buffering data while the PC wanders away to do whatever. If, perhaps, the driver can be configured to assert a high enough priority to avoid this problem, it would work out OK. If your data load is intermittent, well, you can possibly "live" with that. However, if you're trying to capture a long burst, lasting, perhaps 1/2 hour, at 12.50 Mbits/second, you're "circling the bowl."

Using PC's for useful work is becoming increasingly difficult, as the PC drifts in the direction of the MAC, focused on entertainment rather than computing. Entertainment is a vital goal, but compromising the other useful characteristics of an otherwise powerful vehicle just to promote gaming, audio/video distribution, and communication is, IMHO, terribly shortsighted.

I have to agree with Andy, that additional hardware might be desirable.

In fact, a wide parallel interface with wide bandwidth to the PC might be desirable for general purpose interfacing. PC's are capable of processing such data links, but their interfaces to the outside world, particularly since the advent of USB, which is cheap, profitable for the manufacturers, but very limited in its applicability to "useful work", limits such practical usage.

RE