Richard Owlett <rowlett@pcnetinc.com> wrote in
news:530732A7.60102@pcnetinc.com:
> Mac Decman wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 14:45:36 GMT, Al Clark
>> <aclark@danvillesignal.com> wrote:
>> <snip>
>>>
>>> We have many boards and modules that may be useful for
>>> your situation. This could possibly be a another reason
>>> to go with ADI.
>>>
>>> Al Clark
>>> www.danvillesignal.com
>>>
>>>
>> Haha, I just realized that I've talked with you a couple
>> of times at AES SF. Funny, I am always surprised when you
>> meet people online. I just remember your idea to sell the
>> AD-USBICE as a comm package for custom AD designs.
>> Mark
>>
>
> What is "AD-USBICE"?
> Google search got *ZERO* hits!
>
> The sub-string "USBICE" suggests a solution to a plethora
> of problem (some even DSP related).
>
> TIA
>
>
The ADI HP-USB ICE & USB ICE are external emulators made by
Analog Devices
http://www.danvillesignal.com/analog-devices-development-
tools/analog-devices-usb-emulators-ice
There is also something called a debug agent that is
essentially the same thing but implemented as a small module
that is specifically tied to a single target. These are used
in ADI's easy kits and also many of our boards.
Here is a picture of an older version (All of our boards now
use the newer version, the web site is behind):
http://www.danvillesignal.com/dspblok/dspblok-21469usb-analog-
devices-adsp-21469-sharc-dsp-module
The debug agent provides a much less expensive path for
development.
All of these connect via the JTAG port of the DSP.
Al
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Reply by Richard Owlett●February 21, 20142014-02-21
Mac Decman wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 14:45:36 GMT, Al Clark <aclark@danvillesignal.com>
> wrote:
> <snip>
>>
>> We have many boards and modules that may be useful for your
>> situation. This could possibly be a another reason to go with
>> ADI.
>>
>> Al Clark
>> www.danvillesignal.com
>>
>>
> Haha, I just realized that I've talked with you a couple of times at
> AES SF. Funny, I am always surprised when you meet people online.
> I just remember your idea to sell the AD-USBICE as a comm package for
> custom AD designs.
> Mark
>
What is "AD-USBICE"?
Google search got *ZERO* hits!
The sub-string "USBICE" suggests a solution to a plethora of
problem (some even DSP related).
TIA
Reply by Mac Decman●February 21, 20142014-02-21
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 14:45:36 GMT, Al Clark <aclark@danvillesignal.com>
wrote:
<snip>
>
>We have many boards and modules that may be useful for your
>situation. This could possibly be a another reason to go with
>ADI.
>
>Al Clark
>www.danvillesignal.com
>
>
Haha, I just realized that I've talked with you a couple of times at
AES SF. Funny, I am always surprised when you meet people online.
I just remember your idea to sell the AD-USBICE as a comm package for
custom AD designs.
Mark
Reply by angrydude●February 18, 20142014-02-18
OMAP-L138 has secure boot option protecting your IP.
Development board-wise OMAP-L138 LCDK is only $195 and has stereo in/out and lots of other connectivity options plus a possibility to develop complex user-interface logic on ARM part.
I don't think you can do this kind of stuff on SHARC 21469 EZ-KIT Lite plus it's like $550 but it does have 4 analog ins and even more outs built into experimental board.
For surround audio or similar stuff might be better choice, i dunno
On Sunday, February 16, 2014 8:54:43 PM UTC-5, roxy1001 wrote: > Im using DSP for FFT IFT FIR PID applications for which according to my requirement I have zeroed down my list to these two DSPs. * TI-OMAPL138 (Dual Core ARM9+ C6748-DSP) * ADI - ADSP 21469 According to my understanding ADSP 21469 (450MHz) has Hardware accelerator support for FFT FIR IFFT applications which makes processor free for other operations (I guess that's what they mean). Where in TI's parallel ARM processor gives the extended functioning ability when DSP is busy performing numerical operations. both cores run at 465 MHz. I guess that would obviate the need of using another general purpose controller on board for other general purpose applications . I will be implementing these algorithm using MATLAB Simulink Embedded Coder tools for rapid development of the product. My questions are : 1. Which vendor supports best library support with MATLAB environment ? 2. What is the performance of OMAP for 1024-FFT as compared to ADSP 21469 ? 3. What advantage of Dual core (ARM+DSP) & ADIs dedicated FFT IFFT accelerator over each other ? Im using DSPs for the first time Correct me in any case If I'm wrong! Thanks in advance. _____________________________ Posted through www.DSPRelated.com
Reply by Al Clark●February 18, 20142014-02-18
The comparison is actually harder than you may think. I have
lost count of the number of SHARC (including 21469) designs
that I have done. Likewise, someone with extensive TI
experience will likely not be adept at ADI. This means we are
likely experts in only one of the two products.
In my view, ADI is much easier to code.
I would start with a simple basic question:
What are you actually trying to code? How big are the FFTs and
at what sample rate? In many cases, MIPs are not the biggest
issue. The speed of large FFTs may be as determined by how
well you organize memory transfers from SDRAM assuming you
actually need to use it.
What else will the processor be doing?
What peripherals will you need?
We have many boards and modules that may be useful for your
situation. This could possibly be a another reason to go with
ADI.
Al Clark
www.danvillesignal.com
Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> wrote in
news:87y51abg0g.fsf@digitalsignallabs.com:
> "roxy1001" <99467@dsprelated> writes:
>
>> Im using DSP for FFT IFT FIR PID applications for which
>> according to my requirement I have zeroed down my list to
>> these two DSPs.
>>
>> * TI-OMAPL138 (Dual Core ARM9+ C6748-DSP)
>> * ADI - ADSP 21469
>>
>> According to my understanding ADSP 21469 (450MHz) has
>> Hardware accelerator support for FFT FIR IFFT applications
>> which makes processor free for other operations (I guess
>> that's what they mean).
>>
>> Where in TI's parallel ARM processor gives the extended
>> functioning ability when DSP is busy performing numerical
>> operations. both cores run at 465 MHz. I guess that would
>> obviate the need of using another general purpose
>> controller on board for other general purpose applications
>> .
>>
>> I will be implementing these algorithm using MATLAB
>> Simulink Embedded Coder tools for rapid development of the
>> product.
>>
>> My questions are :
>> 1. Which vendor supports best library support with MATLAB
>> environment ? 2. What is the performance of OMAP for
>> 1024-FFT as compared to ADSP 21469 ?
>>
>> 3. What advantage of Dual core (ARM+DSP) & ADIs dedicated
>> FFT IFFT accelerator over each other ?
>>
>> Im using DSPs for the first time Correct me in any case If
>> I'm wrong! Thanks in advance.
>
> Hi,
>
> Are you aware that both these processors are speediest for
> single-precision floating point? I don't know how important
> double precision is for you. It looks like the 67x has
> provisions for doing double precision at about half the
> rate.
>
> The ADI has a SIMD mode that allows you to double-up the
> same operations on multiple data, but it has to be the same
> operations. E.g., when doing an FIR you would have to use
> the same coefficients on two data streams. On the other
> hand, the TI is more general - you can do two different
> FIRS on two different data streams simultaneously.
>
> None of the above leverages the ARM part of the OMAP, so
> you could conceivably gain some computational muscle there,
> too. However, the ADI also looks like it has some
> significant extra muscle with the accelerators.
>
> If you don't care about double precision, my guess is the
> ADI is going to be quicker. Whether or not Matlab's plug
> and play toolbox will successfully, automagically use these
> features is another question.
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Reply by Randy Yates●February 16, 20142014-02-16
"roxy1001" <99467@dsprelated> writes:
> Im using DSP for FFT IFT FIR PID applications for which according to my
> requirement I have zeroed down my list to these two DSPs.
>
> * TI-OMAPL138 (Dual Core ARM9+ C6748-DSP)
> * ADI - ADSP 21469
>
> According to my understanding ADSP 21469 (450MHz) has Hardware accelerator
> support for FFT FIR IFFT applications which makes processor free for other
> operations (I guess that's what they mean).
>
> Where in TI's parallel ARM processor gives the extended functioning ability
> when DSP is busy performing numerical operations. both cores run at 465
> MHz. I guess that would obviate the need of using another general purpose
> controller on board for other general purpose applications .
>
> I will be implementing these algorithm using MATLAB Simulink Embedded Coder
> tools for rapid development of the product.
>
> My questions are :
> 1. Which vendor supports best library support with MATLAB environment ?
> 2. What is the performance of OMAP for 1024-FFT as compared to ADSP 21469 ?
>
> 3. What advantage of Dual core (ARM+DSP) & ADIs dedicated FFT IFFT
> accelerator over each other ?
>
> Im using DSPs for the first time Correct me in any case If I'm wrong!
> Thanks in advance.
Hi,
Are you aware that both these processors are speediest for
single-precision floating point? I don't know how important double
precision is for you. It looks like the 67x has provisions for doing
double precision at about half the rate.
The ADI has a SIMD mode that allows you to double-up the same operations
on multiple data, but it has to be the same operations. E.g., when doing
an FIR you would have to use the same coefficients on two data streams.
On the other hand, the TI is more general - you can do two different
FIRS on two different data streams simultaneously.
None of the above leverages the ARM part of the OMAP, so you could
conceivably gain some computational muscle there, too. However, the ADI
also looks like it has some significant extra muscle with the
accelerators.
If you don't care about double precision, my guess is the ADI is going
to be quicker. Whether or not Matlab's plug and play toolbox will
successfully, automagically use these features is another question.
--
Randy Yates
Digital Signal Labs
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Reply by roxy1001●February 16, 20142014-02-16
Im using DSP for FFT IFT FIR PID applications for which according to my
requirement I have zeroed down my list to these two DSPs.
* TI-OMAPL138 (Dual Core ARM9+ C6748-DSP)
* ADI - ADSP 21469
According to my understanding ADSP 21469 (450MHz) has Hardware accelerator
support for FFT FIR IFFT applications which makes processor free for other
operations (I guess that's what they mean).
Where in TI's parallel ARM processor gives the extended functioning ability
when DSP is busy performing numerical operations. both cores run at 465
MHz. I guess that would obviate the need of using another general purpose
controller on board for other general purpose applications .
I will be implementing these algorithm using MATLAB Simulink Embedded Coder
tools for rapid development of the product.
My questions are :
1. Which vendor supports best library support with MATLAB environment ?
2. What is the performance of OMAP for 1024-FFT as compared to ADSP 21469 ?
3. What advantage of Dual core (ARM+DSP) & ADIs dedicated FFT IFFT
accelerator over each other ?
Im using DSPs for the first time Correct me in any case If I'm wrong!
Thanks in advance.
_____________________________
Posted through www.DSPRelated.com