TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

FPGAs becoming more SoC-like

112 pointsby chclaualmost 7 years ago

4 comments

lnsrualmost 7 years ago
No. There is a more suitable tools now for every problem. Large volume - ASIC, and you can also put few ARM cores inside. Something highly integrated - pick ZynQ. There are dozen different solutions for all the problems starting with big FPGA with couple softcore processors going to cheap spartan 7 device and going to tiny and dirt cheap Lattice chip for glue logic or IO expansion. Tools might be better, but this problem will be solved in the future for sure.
评论 #17272171 未加载
oneplanealmost 7 years ago
But isn't it becoming more like "SoCs gaining FPGA cores"? I know traditional FPGAs got hard CPU cores added, but from the CPU perspective the FPGA core is the new thing.
评论 #17272905 未加载
stochastic_monkalmost 7 years ago
What does SoC stand for? I’m assuming not Summer of Code.
评论 #17273116 未加载
theszalmost 7 years ago
Article says &quot;CPU does not fit FPGA synthesis very well and uses almost whole thing&quot;.<p>People serious about prototyping usually get daughterboards for FPGA and&#x2F;or FPGA stacks specifically to prototype big things with CPUs. The buses can go outside of main FPGA with CPU and into other things. I know at least one big SoC project which went that way.<p>I also think that having an ARM core in FPGA is a vendor lock in. For example, you cannot use AMBA&#x2F;APB&#x2F;AXB and other ARM buses with ARM CPU core in your design without paying ARM for license for these buses. It is not clear to me whether Zynq users have to pay for these buses and it may be case that they have to. Finally, ARM core in the prototype naturally extends into ARM core in the final product.<p>ARM itself is not very nice design from contemporary point of view. I expressed my dissatisfaction with ARM ISA many times here and just let me start with two points: 1) ARM is not RISC (multiregister load&#x2F;store execute in several clocks) and 2) too much of initial design of first ARM (which was not planned for longterm evolution) is visible in ISA.<p>Basically, they put outdated (even for 2010) core design and used valuable silicon area so users have to use that instead of much more capable contemporary designs. Instead of trying to figure out how to change typical FPGA elements and layouts for CPUs to be more synthesable (which may bring benefits in other places), they decided to use that ARM thing.<p>I am deeply disappointed with that path.
评论 #17273219 未加载
评论 #17274052 未加载
评论 #17273709 未加载
评论 #17274093 未加载