Rainer Buchty wrote: > > > The Xilinx XC9500 CPLD series might be a better choice. It's available > > in smaller configurations, it can handle 3.3 and 5V I/O, it's flash > > based so you don't need the external EEPROM, but it's still in-circuit > > programmable. > > Personally, I'd say that's a matter of price. > Yes, definitely. > > But going for a REC clone we > already needs 10 registers of 8bit which comes to 80 flipflops, going to > 16MB will take another 8 for bank selection. So we already have used 88 > flipflops (macrocells) before it comes to functionality... So we probably > won't go for a XC95108/PC84 but at least a XC95144/TQ100 which costs > $15.95 at min buy 25 (www.avnetmarshall.com) and slowest speed. > Hmmm... right. I didn't realize that there were so many registers. Yeah, maybe the XCS10 is a better choice. If the 61 I/O's of the 84-pin package is enough it should be about the same price as the XC95144/TQ100 (with 72 I/O's), but offer a lot more logic power. Isn't the Spartan limited to 1.5 or 2.5V supply though? Marko Mäkelä wrote: > > > Working *together* on *free* VHDL models of the various custom chips (and > > the CPU) is something I'd highly appreciate. > > Me too. Do you know if the tools are freely available? I like the Atmel > AVR family of microcontrollers, because everything can be done with free > software. I use the avra assembler and the uisp programmer. > There is some free VHDL tools available [http://www.opencollector.org/collector.php3]. In my experience though, they offer far from what you get with commercial tools. I have some experience with PeakFPGA from Accolade (http://www.peakvhdl.com/) which I found to be very powerful, although maybe a bit pricey for this audience at $2500. -- Christer Palm Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Archive generated by hypermail 2.1.1.