Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #14478

Re: GA144 article

Show all headers | View raw

On Friday, July 27, 2012 5:31:29 PM UTC-4, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > People used FPGAs 20 years ago because they were useful then, just as
> > the GA144 is useful now.  It can do things that no other chip can do.
> 
> Well, I know the GA144 has unique capabilities, I'm just not so clear on
> how to do anything useful with them.
> 
> >> > I have seen products shipped using only 10% of a $1500 FPGA. ...
> > You are missing one of the big advantages of FPGAs, that you can
> > update the firmware and ship a product that can be expanded in the
> > field.
> 
> OK, they were using 10% of it for the initial delivery and the other 90%
> for future expansion.  That's no problem, it's like shipping a PC with a
> terabyte hard drive which is 99% empty as it will be filled up later.
> If they're likely to use much of it, then great.  Otherwise maybe they
> should have used a smaller part.
> 
> > A Xilinx rep once tried to make a point to me by saying, they are
> > selling me the routing and GIVING me the LUTs for FREE!... they prefer
> > to reduce the chip cost by not adding as much routing so some of their
> > customers can't use all the LUTs.
> 
> OK, so you're using most or all of the routing, with LUTs left over.

No, no FPGA I know of would allow you to use even 5% of the routing resources.  That is the point.  They have to provide routing to make the chip at all useful and most of that is wasted.  The LUTs are what you know how to use so you think in terms of counting LUT usage.  But in reality you pay for the entire chip and use a small fraction of it no matter what.  Worry not if you can use all the resources, worry if your design will fit.  It's that simple. 


> Can you do the same with a GA144?  Maybe more relevantly, most types of
> computational resources go to bottomless appetites.  Can I use a 144
> core x86?  Yes.  What about 144,000 cores?  144 million?  Yes and yes.
> But, an imagined 1000 core GA processor seems like even more of an
> enigma than the GA144, in terms of what to use it for, unless there are
> accompanying architectural updates.

They can't even keep 4 x86 CPUs supplied with data from memory so I have no idea what you would do with 144 of them on a single chip.  You are still thinking of them as x86 processors.  They aren't at all.  They are elements in an FPGA like device.  Worry about your app, not meaningless metrics that have no value. 


> > Chuck's philosophy is the same.  The nodes are cheap, so what if you
> > can't use all 144?  Does your app need 144 nodes?  Worry about getting
> > your app done, not how many nodes you can utilize.
> 
> The GA144's defining characteristic is the high number of nodes.  If I'm
> not using them, I have to wonder whether a conventional CPU or FPGA
> could have solved my problem better.

If you think the number 144 is where the magic comes from then you don't get the GA144.  How about a GA32?  Only 32 processors to occupy with all the same IO.  Does that make you any more satisfied with the GA32? 


> > I can't think of an app where the GA144 processing is fast enough but
> > the comms time is too slow.
> 
> Think of a node using some extra nodes as ram.  If there are intervening
> wire nodes that slows it down by a significant factor.

Why would you use RAM in a node that is not next to the node using the RAM?  


> > The GA144 is here now and I am working to use it.
> 
> This is great, I'm eager to see how it comes out.  I'm not a hardware
> guy so I'm sure there are many ideas that I don't think of.

So far the only thing that has tickled my imagination for this chip (other than software defined radios, SDR) is a single chip oscilloscope.  I'm still working on the details so it may not pan out, but we'll see.  An SDR is a more aggressive app in terms of development effort I think, so the o'scope is a stepping stone.  But even the o'scope will require me to build my own board as the GA eval board uses slower static RAM and I think I need faster SDRAM. 

Rick

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

GA144 article Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-18 03:48 -0700
  Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-19 10:51 -0700
    Re: GA144 article Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-20 01:30 -0700
      Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-20 01:48 -0700
        Re: GA144 article Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-20 03:25 -0700
        Re: GA144 article Syd Rumpo <usenet@neonica.co.uk> - 2012-07-20 11:59 +0100
      Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-22 18:59 -0700
        Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-22 19:16 -0700
          Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-22 19:31 -0700
            Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-22 20:08 -0700
              Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-23 16:24 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-23 22:33 -0700
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-24 14:04 -0700
            Re: GA144 article vandys@vsta.org - 2012-07-23 03:34 +0000
            Re: GA144 article Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-07-23 14:11 +0200
              Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-23 16:47 -0700
              Re: GA144 article "Clyde W. Phillips Jr." <cwpjr02@gmail.com> - 2012-07-24 20:11 -0700
          Re: GA144 article Richard Owlett <rowlett@pcnetinc.com> - 2012-07-23 02:04 -0500
  Re: GA144 article Daniel Kalny <dkalny@seznam.cz> - 2012-07-24 02:37 -0700
    Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-24 03:12 -0700
      Re: GA144 article stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-07-24 10:36 +0000
        Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-24 10:28 -0700
          Re: GA144 article Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-07-24 22:12 +0000
      Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-24 14:49 -0700
        Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-26 13:25 -0700
          Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-27 13:17 -0700
            Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-27 14:31 -0700
              Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-27 22:02 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-28 23:03 -0700
                Re: GA144 article marko <marko@marko.marko> - 2012-07-30 09:12 +1000
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-31 01:09 -0700
                Re: GA144 article marko <marko@marko.marko> - 2012-08-01 00:19 +1000
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-31 09:59 -0700
                Re: GA144 article marko <marko@marko.marko> - 2012-08-01 10:13 +1000
                Re: GA144 article Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-08-01 00:59 +0200
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-31 16:54 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Luca Saiu <positron@gnu.org> - 2012-08-04 10:46 +0200
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-08-05 11:04 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Luca Saiu <positron@gnu.org> - 2012-08-06 02:02 +0200
                Re: GA144 article Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-06 02:16 -0700
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-30 08:23 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-30 21:33 -0700
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-31 01:51 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-31 11:48 -0700
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-07-31 14:54 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-31 16:09 -0700
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-08-01 12:57 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-01 14:16 -0700
                Re: GA144 article vandys@vsta.org - 2012-08-01 22:32 +0000
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-08-01 16:03 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-01 16:13 -0700
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-08-01 16:10 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-01 22:18 -0700
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-08-02 11:47 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-02 14:32 -0700
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-08-02 16:01 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-02 16:38 -0700
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-08-03 08:40 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-03 09:19 -0700
                Re: GA144 article rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-08-03 11:15 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-05 15:50 -0700
                Re: GA144 article Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-06 02:21 -0700

csiph-web