??? 04/16/05 10:14 Read: times Msg Score: +1 +2 Good Answer/Helpful -1 Offensive/Flame |
#91722 - Absolute rubbish Oleg Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Well, as about clock. Multiplifier CPLD realization may or may not require a clock. When clock is not involved then synthesis implements the function with pure logic - just a cascade of summators with many carryes expansions. It all results with huge logic and slow result time. When clock is utilized then process is implemented using pipeline, i.e. "shift-[hold]-sum" method. It may or may not increase the logic cells usage but surely decreases the time of result. Indeed, the result time is very depended on clock frequency then. It is because all pipeline stages are changed with clock ratio. So when clock is slow then you may not obtain good time anyway. Can we just clear something up? what you are saying here is rubbish 1, Using a clock for a multiplier does not infer a pipelined multiplier. 2, A 10 bit multiplier as a single block of logic is not huge as I tried to show it takes about 190 LE's 3, The resulting multiplier is not slow and certainly using a standard cpld speeds of at least 70 Mhz are easily achieved. 4, Nobody uses Altera 7000 cplds for new designs. 5, I cannot remember what other rubish you wrote something about costing $30-80 But please just stop writting stuff about things you clearly know nothing about.Its annoying it confuses the issues it doesnt help. |
Topic | Author | Date |
Fast Square. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Square dancing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
table lookup??? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
code & algorithm | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
16*16 bit is slower than what I want. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
How fast? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: How Fast | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
... probably impossible in 15 cycles | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
why cycles ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: Microseconds | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
table lookup | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Natsemi appnote or CORDIC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Natsemi link to appnote | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
(a+b)^2=a^2+2*a*b+b^2 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Thats Slow. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
faster need hardware | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
How fast do you need? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: How Fast. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Just? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Incorrect | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Correct? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Whooooopa... Sorry. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Thanks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I tried... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
optimum? table driven | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Jan metod | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Hardware? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
CPLD? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
SILabs f12x does it in hardware | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: SiLabs F12x | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Price | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
F12x price | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
F12x MAC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
provided in the datasheet | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Just out of interest | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
clarification | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
CPLD? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
too expensive | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Absolute rubbish Oleg | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
explain | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
your right | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
especially for those... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I need to say this.... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
By the way..... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
just a demo | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Hang on. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Oh bollocks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Well oleg | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Please check my answer. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Here you go | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
You're having me on. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Pascal? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Pascal? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Why ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
It was changed because,,, | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Its because | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
For Jez | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
For Michael | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
simulation | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Re: Fast Square | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Prahlad, waithing for a conclusion | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
just an exercise... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Tricky | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Jez asked his cat, I asked my sheep | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Conclusion. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
SPI EEPROM![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 |