I am sorry, C6714 was a typo, what I meant was 6416, I am a little bit panic these days never mind :)
So what you mean is 6416 has some advantages over PC, can you please tell me what are the advantages of using 6416 over PC.

Thank you,

Heidar

----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Brower
To: Heidar Mhr
Cc: c...
Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 6:53:11 PM
Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing

Heidar-

> Your guess is right because this is my first project with
> 6713 board. What I initially thought was if I do this project
> on DSP board it will result in a faster performance! Then
> according to what you said there is no advantage of using
> any of the TI DSP boards for implementing this project(even
> C6714)? If the answer is yes, then I should probably look
> for a different project for my final year projec:)

What I said was:

-don't use 6713 board, for several reasons

-use 6416 DSK or EVM DM642 board to have some advantage
over PC with good academic availability at reasonable
cost

The 6416 DSK has 1 GHz 6416 device, the EVM DM642 has 720 MHz DM642 plus analog video
I/O.

There is no '6714'. C6713 is an old chip and slow (300 MHz). Just because you have
a DSK 6713 board on hand does not mean it should be used for a year 2007 image
processing student project.

-Jeff

> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jeff Brower
> To: Heidar Mhr
> Cc: c6x@yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 1:53:59 PM
> Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
>
> Heidar Mhr-
>
> > Thanks for your kind response. I am more familiar with MATLAB and it
> > won't be so difficult to implement it in MATLAB but my goal is to use
> > the DSP board to implement an OCR. By being faster, I didn't mean
> > faster to develop but I meant faster performance (i.e. faster
> > recognition and execution) than MATLAB.
>
> 300 MHz 6713 won't be faster than a 2+ GHz PC running MATLAB.
>
> > If I do it in MATLAB then I will have to re-write the whole thing
> > again in C that is why I decided to do it on board from the beginning.
>
> You can go straight for the DSP board implementation, but you sound inexperienced.
> If you try to get such a complex algorithm running on 6713 board from scratch, my
> guess is it will take you several months and even then you could still have
> problems.
>
> > And since I don't have C6716, is it possible to implement it in 6713
> > and then transfer it to 6714 later easily?
>
> There are two major problems with using 6713 for image/video processing:
>
> -TI doesn't have optimized image processing functions
> available for 6713
>
> -when you try to get help on the tech groups, you will
> be doing your project "weird" compared to your peers,
> who will not be inclined to help
>
> I suggest you start by showing that you can solve engineering type problems, which
> include finding the correct resources. If this is a Univ project then you should
> have no problem to locate a DSK 6416 (or possibly EVM DM642) board. You should
> start asking around, including Professors, colleagues, TI sales, etc. If this is a
> commercial project, then the cost of DSK 6416 is very low and should not be an
> obstacle.
>
> -Jeff
>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Jeff Brower
>> To: Heidar Mhr
>> Cc: c6x@yahoogroups. com
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 12:00:05 PM
>> Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
>>
>> Heidar Mhr-
>>
>> > Thank you for your reply. I don't want to use the RTDX but I want
>> > to directly implement the project on the board (write C code). In
>> > this case do you think it will be faster than using MATLAB for such
>> > a project? I have worked with 6713 and don't know much about 6416.
>> > Will be waiting for your reply.
>>
>> Faster to develop? If you are inexperienced, then it would be faster to get it
>> working in MATLAB first and understand the algorithm, then get it working on a
>> DSP board. Otherwise you could easily get the algorithm design "bent out of
>> shape" due to difficulties with understanding embedded system issues such as I/O
>> interfaces, memory allocation, cache, DMA, efficient use of MAC units, etc.
>>
>> As for 6713 vs. 6416, I would strongly urge you *not* to use 6713 for a new
>> design involving image processing. TI has shown no inclination to increase clock
>> rate or performance of the basic chip core for their 67xx floating-point
>> processors now for almost 5 years. Their emphasis has been on the 64xx series of
>> devices.
>>
>> -Jeff
>> > ----- Original Message ----
>> > From: Jeff Brower
>> > To: Oghab
>> > Cc: c6x@yahoogroups. com
>> > Sent: Monday, January 1, 2007 10:27:03 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
>> > Oghab-
>> >
>> > > I want to use C6713 to implement an Optical Character Recognition system. Do
>> > > you think that using the DSK makes the process faster than using for example
>> > > MATLAB for this project?
>> >
>> > A DSP-based DSK board could make some functions / blocks faster. But time taken
>> > to
>> > move data between MATLAB and the board using RTDX will tend to cancel out speed
>> > advantages of the DSP.
>> >
>> > The main reasons for using a DSK board are a) if the project objective is create
>> > a
>> > DSP based product, or b) to learn about DSP. In that case, being able to test
>> > and
>> > debug DSP code step-by-step is a great advantage, saving a lot of time and
>> > allowing
>> > DSP results to be compared with MATLAB results at any point along the way.
>> >
>> > For image processing applications, a DSK 6416 or EVM 6455 board would be much
>> > more
>> > suitable than the DSK 6713 -- much faster, as well as better supported by TI for
>> >
>> > image processing.
>> >
>> > -Jeff
>> >

Heidar-

Also I should add:

4) Power consumption. A DSP-based implementation will be substantially less than a
PC implementation. An OCR application should be do-able under 4W. The PC is a
general purpose platform that needs to support a wide range of OS and motherboard
things which are unnecessary for a specific application such as OCR.

-Jeff
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:43:48 -0600
From: Jeff Brower
Organization: Signalogic, Inc
To: Heidar Mhr
CC: c...

Heidar-

> I am sorry, C6714 was a typo, what I meant was 6416, I am a
> little bit panic these days never mind :) So what you mean is
> 6416 has some advantages over PC, can you please tell me what
> are the advantages of using 6416 over PC.

1) Speed. Single-cycle instruction 6416 running at 1 GHz with (4) parallel
multiply/acc units will process image and video algorithms faster than most PCs. I'm
guessing that a 3 GHz dual Xeon might come close, but even then the 1 GHz 6416 might
have about a 2:1 edge.

2) Learning. If the purpose of your academic project involves signal processing,
then getting involved with DSP community, TI products, optimized image processing
algorithms, etc. would be beneficial.

3) Product design experience. Smaller, low power, high performance products that
perform image and video processing are typically not PCs. Gaining some experience
with size constraints, resource constraints, various I/O interfaces, etc. may be
valuable compared to using a PC.

-Jeff
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jeff Brower
> To: Heidar Mhr
> Cc: c...
> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 6:53:11 PM
> Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
> Heidar-
>
> > Your guess is right because this is my first project with
> > 6713 board. What I initially thought was if I do this project
> > on DSP board it will result in a faster performance! Then
> > according to what you said there is no advantage of using
> > any of the TI DSP boards for implementing this project(even
> > C6714)? If the answer is yes, then I should probably look
> > for a different project for my final year projec:)
>
> What I said was:
>
> -don't use 6713 board, for several reasons
>
> -use 6416 DSK or EVM DM642 board to have some advantage
> over PC with good academic availability at reasonable
> cost
>
> The 6416 DSK has 1 GHz 6416 device, the EVM DM642 has 720 MHz DM642 plus analog
> video
> I/O.
>
> There is no '6714'. C6713 is an old chip and slow (300 MHz). Just because you have
> a DSK 6713 board on hand does not mean it should be used for a year 2007 image
> processing student project.
>
> -Jeff
>
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Jeff Brower
> > To: Heidar Mhr
> > Cc: c6x@yahoogroups. com
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 1:53:59 PM
> > Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
> >
> > Heidar Mhr-
> >
> > > Thanks for your kind response. I am more familiar with MATLAB and it
> > > won't be so difficult to implement it in MATLAB but my goal is to use
> > > the DSP board to implement an OCR. By being faster, I didn't mean
> > > faster to develop but I meant faster performance (i.e. faster
> > > recognition and execution) than MATLAB.
> >
> > 300 MHz 6713 won't be faster than a 2+ GHz PC running MATLAB.
> >
> > > If I do it in MATLAB then I will have to re-write the whole thing
> > > again in C that is why I decided to do it on board from the beginning.
> >
> > You can go straight for the DSP board implementation, but you sound
> inexperienced.
> > If you try to get such a complex algorithm running on 6713 board from scratch, my
>
> > guess is it will take you several months and even then you could still have
> > problems.
> >
> > > And since I don't have C6716, is it possible to implement it in 6713
> > > and then transfer it to 6714 later easily?
> >
> > There are two major problems with using 6713 for image/video processing:
> >
> > -TI doesn't have optimized image processing functions
> > available for 6713
> >
> > -when you try to get help on the tech groups, you will
> > be doing your project "weird" compared to your peers,
> > who will not be inclined to help
> >
> > I suggest you start by showing that you can solve engineering type problems,
> which
> > include finding the correct resources. If this is a Univ project then you should
> > have no problem to locate a DSK 6416 (or possibly EVM DM642) board. You should
> > start asking around, including Professors, colleagues, TI sales, etc. If this is
> a
> > commercial project, then the cost of DSK 6416 is very low and should not be an
> > obstacle.
> >
> > -Jeff
> >
> >> ----- Original Message ----
> >> From: Jeff Brower
> >> To: Heidar Mhr
> >> Cc: c6x@yahoogroups. com
> >> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 12:00:05 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
> >>
> >> Heidar Mhr-
> >>
> >> > Thank you for your reply. I don't want to use the RTDX but I want
> >> > to directly implement the project on the board (write C code). In
> >> > this case do you think it will be faster than using MATLAB for such
> >> > a project? I have worked with 6713 and don't know much about 6416.
> >> > Will be waiting for your reply.
> >>
> >> Faster to develop? If you are inexperienced, then it would be faster to get it
> >> working in MATLAB first and understand the algorithm, then get it working on a
> >> DSP board. Otherwise you could easily get the algorithm design "bent out of
> >> shape" due to difficulties with understanding embedded system issues such as I/O
>
> >> interfaces, memory allocation, cache, DMA, efficient use of MAC units, etc.
> >>
> >> As for 6713 vs. 6416, I would strongly urge you *not* to use 6713 for a new
> >> design involving image processing. TI has shown no inclination to increase clock
>
> >> rate or performance of the basic chip core for their 67xx floating-point
> >> processors now for almost 5 years. Their emphasis has been on the 64xx series of
>
> >> devices.
> >>
> >> -Jeff
> >>
> >>
> >> > ----- Original Message ----
> >> > From: Jeff Brower
> >> > To: Oghab
> >> > Cc: c6x@yahoogroups. com
> >> > Sent: Monday, January 1, 2007 10:27:03 PM
> >> > Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
> >> > Oghab-
> >> >
> >> > > I want to use C6713 to implement an Optical Character Recognition system. Do
>
> >> > > you think that using the DSK makes the process faster than using for example
>
> >> > > MATLAB for this project?
> >> >
> >> > A DSP-based DSK board could make some functions / blocks faster. But time
> taken
> >> > to
> >> > move data between MATLAB and the board using RTDX will tend to cancel out
> speed
> >> > advantages of the DSP.
> >> >
> >> > The main reasons for using a DSK board are a) if the project objective is
> create
> >> > a
> >> > DSP based product, or b) to learn about DSP. In that case, being able to test
> >> > and
> >> > debug DSP code step-by-step is a great advantage, saving a lot of time and
> >> > allowing
> >> > DSP results to be compared with MATLAB results at any point along the way.
> >> >
> >> > For image processing applications, a DSK 6416 or EVM 6455 board would be much
> >> > more
> >> > suitable than the DSK 6713 -- much faster, as well as better supported by TI
> for
> >> >
> >> > image processing.
> >> >
> >> > -Jeff
>

Heidar-

> I am sorry, C6714 was a typo, what I meant was 6416, I am a
> little bit panic these days never mind :) So what you mean is
> 6416 has some advantages over PC, can you please tell me what
> are the advantages of using 6416 over PC.

1) Speed. Single-cycle instruction 6416 running at 1 GHz with (4) parallel
multiply/acc units will process image and video algorithms faster than most PCs. I'm
guessing that a 3 GHz dual Xeon might come close, but even then the 1 GHz 6416 might
have about a 2:1 edge.

2) Learning. If the purpose of your academic project involves signal processing,
then getting involved with DSP community, TI products, optimized image processing
algorithms, etc. would be beneficial.

3) Product design experience. Smaller, low power, high performance products that
perform image and video processing are typically not PCs. Gaining some experience
with size constraints, resource constraints, various I/O interfaces, etc. may be
valuable compared to using a PC.

-Jeff
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jeff Brower
> To: Heidar Mhr
> Cc: c...
> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 6:53:11 PM
> Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
> Heidar-
>
> > Your guess is right because this is my first project with
> > 6713 board. What I initially thought was if I do this project
> > on DSP board it will result in a faster performance! Then
> > according to what you said there is no advantage of using
> > any of the TI DSP boards for implementing this project(even
> > C6714)? If the answer is yes, then I should probably look
> > for a different project for my final year projec:)
>
> What I said was:
>
> -don't use 6713 board, for several reasons
>
> -use 6416 DSK or EVM DM642 board to have some advantage
> over PC with good academic availability at reasonable
> cost
>
> The 6416 DSK has 1 GHz 6416 device, the EVM DM642 has 720 MHz DM642 plus analog
> video
> I/O.
>
> There is no '6714'. C6713 is an old chip and slow (300 MHz). Just because you have
> a DSK 6713 board on hand does not mean it should be used for a year 2007 image
> processing student project.
>
> -Jeff
>
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Jeff Brower
> > To: Heidar Mhr
> > Cc: c6x@yahoogroups. com
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 1:53:59 PM
> > Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
> >
> > Heidar Mhr-
> >
> > > Thanks for your kind response. I am more familiar with MATLAB and it
> > > won't be so difficult to implement it in MATLAB but my goal is to use
> > > the DSP board to implement an OCR. By being faster, I didn't mean
> > > faster to develop but I meant faster performance (i.e. faster
> > > recognition and execution) than MATLAB.
> >
> > 300 MHz 6713 won't be faster than a 2+ GHz PC running MATLAB.
> >
> > > If I do it in MATLAB then I will have to re-write the whole thing
> > > again in C that is why I decided to do it on board from the beginning.
> >
> > You can go straight for the DSP board implementation, but you sound
> inexperienced.
> > If you try to get such a complex algorithm running on 6713 board from scratch, my
>
> > guess is it will take you several months and even then you could still have
> > problems.
> >
> > > And since I don't have C6716, is it possible to implement it in 6713
> > > and then transfer it to 6714 later easily?
> >
> > There are two major problems with using 6713 for image/video processing:
> >
> > -TI doesn't have optimized image processing functions
> > available for 6713
> >
> > -when you try to get help on the tech groups, you will
> > be doing your project "weird" compared to your peers,
> > who will not be inclined to help
> >
> > I suggest you start by showing that you can solve engineering type problems,
> which
> > include finding the correct resources. If this is a Univ project then you should
> > have no problem to locate a DSK 6416 (or possibly EVM DM642) board. You should
> > start asking around, including Professors, colleagues, TI sales, etc. If this is
> a
> > commercial project, then the cost of DSK 6416 is very low and should not be an
> > obstacle.
> >
> > -Jeff
> >
> >> ----- Original Message ----
> >> From: Jeff Brower
> >> To: Heidar Mhr
> >> Cc: c6x@yahoogroups. com
> >> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 12:00:05 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
> >>
> >> Heidar Mhr-
> >>
> >> > Thank you for your reply. I don't want to use the RTDX but I want
> >> > to directly implement the project on the board (write C code). In
> >> > this case do you think it will be faster than using MATLAB for such
> >> > a project? I have worked with 6713 and don't know much about 6416.
> >> > Will be waiting for your reply.
> >>
> >> Faster to develop? If you are inexperienced, then it would be faster to get it
> >> working in MATLAB first and understand the algorithm, then get it working on a
> >> DSP board. Otherwise you could easily get the algorithm design "bent out of
> >> shape" due to difficulties with understanding embedded system issues such as I/O
>
> >> interfaces, memory allocation, cache, DMA, efficient use of MAC units, etc.
> >>
> >> As for 6713 vs. 6416, I would strongly urge you *not* to use 6713 for a new
> >> design involving image processing. TI has shown no inclination to increase clock
>
> >> rate or performance of the basic chip core for their 67xx floating-point
> >> processors now for almost 5 years. Their emphasis has been on the 64xx series of
>
> >> devices.
> >>
> >> -Jeff
> >>
> >>
> >> > ----- Original Message ----
> >> > From: Jeff Brower
> >> > To: Oghab
> >> > Cc: c6x@yahoogroups. com
> >> > Sent: Monday, January 1, 2007 10:27:03 PM
> >> > Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
> >> > Oghab-
> >> >
> >> > > I want to use C6713 to implement an Optical Character Recognition system. Do
>
> >> > > you think that using the DSK makes the process faster than using for example
>
> >> > > MATLAB for this project?
> >> >
> >> > A DSP-based DSK board could make some functions / blocks faster. But time
> taken
> >> > to
> >> > move data between MATLAB and the board using RTDX will tend to cancel out
> speed
> >> > advantages of the DSP.
> >> >
> >> > The main reasons for using a DSK board are a) if the project objective is
> create
> >> > a
> >> > DSP based product, or b) to learn about DSP. In that case, being able to test
> >> > and
> >> > debug DSP code step-by-step is a great advantage, saving a lot of time and
> >> > allowing
> >> > DSP results to be compared with MATLAB results at any point along the way.
> >> >
> >> > For image processing applications, a DSK 6416 or EVM 6455 board would be much
> >> > more
> >> > suitable than the DSK 6713 -- much faster, as well as better supported by TI
> for
> >> >
> >> > image processing.
> >> >
> >> > -Jeff
>

Heidar-

> Your guess is right because this is my first project with
> 6713 board. What I initially thought was if I do this project
> on DSP board it will result in a faster performance! Then
> according to what you said there is no advantage of using
> any of the TI DSP boards for implementing this project(even
> C6714)? If the answer is yes, then I should probably look
> for a different project for my final year projec:)

What I said was:

-don't use 6713 board, for several reasons

-use 6416 DSK or EVM DM642 board to have some advantage
over PC with good academic availability at reasonable
cost

The 6416 DSK has 1 GHz 6416 device, the EVM DM642 has 720 MHz DM642 plus analog video
I/O.

There is no '6714'. C6713 is an old chip and slow (300 MHz). Just because you have
a DSK 6713 board on hand does not mean it should be used for a year 2007 image
processing student project.

-Jeff
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jeff Brower
> To: Heidar Mhr
> Cc: c...
> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 1:53:59 PM
> Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
>
> Heidar Mhr-
>
> > Thanks for your kind response. I am more familiar with MATLAB and it
> > won't be so difficult to implement it in MATLAB but my goal is to use
> > the DSP board to implement an OCR. By being faster, I didn't mean
> > faster to develop but I meant faster performance (i.e. faster
> > recognition and execution) than MATLAB.
>
> 300 MHz 6713 won't be faster than a 2+ GHz PC running MATLAB.
>
> > If I do it in MATLAB then I will have to re-write the whole thing
> > again in C that is why I decided to do it on board from the beginning.
>
> You can go straight for the DSP board implementation, but you sound inexperienced.
> If you try to get such a complex algorithm running on 6713 board from scratch, my
> guess is it will take you several months and even then you could still have
> problems.
>
> > And since I don't have C6716, is it possible to implement it in 6713
> > and then transfer it to 6714 later easily?
>
> There are two major problems with using 6713 for image/video processing:
>
> -TI doesn't have optimized image processing functions
> available for 6713
>
> -when you try to get help on the tech groups, you will
> be doing your project "weird" compared to your peers,
> who will not be inclined to help
>
> I suggest you start by showing that you can solve engineering type problems, which
> include finding the correct resources. If this is a Univ project then you should
> have no problem to locate a DSK 6416 (or possibly EVM DM642) board. You should
> start asking around, including Professors, colleagues, TI sales, etc. If this is a
> commercial project, then the cost of DSK 6416 is very low and should not be an
> obstacle.
>
> -Jeff
>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Jeff Brower
>> To: Heidar Mhr
>> Cc: c...
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 12:00:05 PM
>> Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
>>
>> Heidar Mhr-
>>
>> > Thank you for your reply. I don't want to use the RTDX but I want
>> > to directly implement the project on the board (write C code). In
>> > this case do you think it will be faster than using MATLAB for such
>> > a project? I have worked with 6713 and don't know much about 6416.
>> > Will be waiting for your reply.
>>
>> Faster to develop? If you are inexperienced, then it would be faster to get it
>> working in MATLAB first and understand the algorithm, then get it working on a
>> DSP board. Otherwise you could easily get the algorithm design "bent out of
>> shape" due to difficulties with understanding embedded system issues such as I/O
>> interfaces, memory allocation, cache, DMA, efficient use of MAC units, etc.
>>
>> As for 6713 vs. 6416, I would strongly urge you *not* to use 6713 for a new
>> design involving image processing. TI has shown no inclination to increase clock
>> rate or performance of the basic chip core for their 67xx floating-point
>> processors now for almost 5 years. Their emphasis has been on the 64xx series of
>> devices.
>>
>> -Jeff
>> > ----- Original Message ----
>> > From: Jeff Brower
>> > To: Oghab
>> > Cc: c...
>> > Sent: Monday, January 1, 2007 10:27:03 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
>> > Oghab-
>> >
>> > > I want to use C6713 to implement an Optical Character Recognition system. Do
>> > > you think that using the DSK makes the process faster than using for example
>> > > MATLAB for this project?
>> >
>> > A DSP-based DSK board could make some functions / blocks faster. But time taken
>> > to
>> > move data between MATLAB and the board using RTDX will tend to cancel out speed
>> > advantages of the DSP.
>> >
>> > The main reasons for using a DSK board are a) if the project objective is create
>> > a
>> > DSP based product, or b) to learn about DSP. In that case, being able to test
>> > and
>> > debug DSP code step-by-step is a great advantage, saving a lot of time and
>> > allowing
>> > DSP results to be compared with MATLAB results at any point along the way.
>> >
>> > For image processing applications, a DSK 6416 or EVM 6455 board would be much
>> > more
>> > suitable than the DSK 6713 -- much faster, as well as better supported by TI for
>> >
>> > image processing.
>> >
>> > -Jeff
>> >

Heidar Mhr-

> Thank you for your reply. I don't want to use the RTDX but I want
> to directly implement the project on the board (write C code). In
> this case do you think it will be faster than using MATLAB for such
> a project? I have worked with 6713 and don't know much about 6416.
> Will be waiting for your reply.

Faster to develop? If you are inexperienced, then it would be faster to get it
working in MATLAB first and understand the algorithm, then get it working on a DSP
board. Otherwise you could easily get the algorithm design "bent out of shape" due
to difficulties with understanding embedded system issues such as I/O interfaces,
memory allocation, cache, DMA, efficient use of MAC units, etc.

As for 6713 vs. 6416, I would strongly urge you *not* to use 6713 for a new design
involving image processing. TI has shown no inclination to increase clock rate or
performance of the basic chip core for their 67xx floating-point processors now for
almost 5 years. Their emphasis has been on the 64xx series of devices.

-Jeff
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jeff Brower
> To: Oghab
> Cc: c...
> Sent: Monday, January 1, 2007 10:27:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
> Oghab-
>
> > I want to use C6713 to implement an Optical Character Recognition system. Do
> > you think that using the DSK makes the process faster than using for example
> > MATLAB for this project?
>
> A DSP-based DSK board could make some functions / blocks faster. But time taken to
>
> move data between MATLAB and the board using RTDX will tend to cancel out speed
> advantages of the DSP.
>
> The main reasons for using a DSK board are a) if the project objective is create a
> DSP based product, or b) to learn about DSP. In that case, being able to test and
> debug DSP code step-by-step is a great advantage, saving a lot of time and allowing
>
> DSP results to be compared with MATLAB results at any point along the way.
>
> For image processing applications, a DSK 6416 or EVM 6455 board would be much more
> suitable than the DSK 6713 -- much faster, as well as better supported by TI for
> image processing.
>
> -Jeff
>

Mr. Jeff Brower,

Your guess is right because this is my first project with 6713 board. What I initially thought was if I do this project on DSP board it will result in a faster performance! Then according to what you said there is no advantage of using any of the TI DSP boards for implementing this project(even C6714)? If the answer is yes, then I should probably look for a different project for my final year projec:)

waiting for your reply,
Thank you
Heidar
----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Brower
To: Heidar Mhr
Cc: c...
Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 1:53:59 PM
Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing

Heidar Mhr-
> Thanks for your kind response. I am more familiar with MATLAB and it
> won't be so difficult to implement it in MATLAB but my goal is to use
> the DSP board to implement an OCR. By being faster, I didn't mean
> faster to develop but I meant faster performance (i.e. faster
> recognition and execution) than MATLAB.
300 MHz 6713 won't be faster than a 2+ GHz PC running MATLAB.
> If I do it in MATLAB then I will have to re-write the whole thing
> again in C that is why I decided to do it on board from the beginning.
You can go straight for the DSP board implementation, but you sound inexperienced. If you try to get such a complex algorithm running on 6713 board from scratch, my guess is it will take you several months and even then you could still have problems.
> And since I don't have C6716, is it possible to implement it in 6713
> and then transfer it to 6714 later easily?
There are two major problems with using 6713 for image/video processing:
-TI doesn't have optimized image processing functions
available for 6713
-when you try to get help on the tech groups, you will
be doing your project "weird" compared to your peers,
who will not be inclined to help
I suggest you start by showing that you can solve engineering type problems, which include finding the correct resources. If this is a Univ project then you should have no problem to locate a DSK 6416 (or possibly EVM DM642) board. You should start asking around, including Professors, colleagues, TI sales, etc. If this is a commercial project, then the cost of DSK 6416 is very low and should not be an obstacle.
-Jeff
----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Brower
To: Heidar Mhr
Cc: c...
Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 12:00:05 PM
Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
Heidar Mhr-
> Thank you for your reply. I don't want to use the RTDX but I want
> to directly implement the project on the board (write C code). In
> this case do you think it will be faster than using MATLAB for such
> a project? I have worked with 6713 and don't know much about 6416.
> Will be waiting for your reply.
Faster to develop? If you are inexperienced, then it would be faster to get it working in MATLAB first and understand the algorithm, then get it working on a DSP board. Otherwise you could easily get the algorithm design "bent out of shape" due to difficulties with understanding embedded system issues such as I/O interfaces, memory allocation, cache, DMA, efficient use of MAC units, etc.
As for 6713 vs. 6416, I would strongly urge you *not* to use 6713 for a new design involving image processing. TI has shown no inclination to increase clock rate or performance of the basic chip core for their 67xx floating-point processors now for almost 5 years. Their emphasis has been on the 64xx series of devices.
-Jeff

----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Brower
To: Oghab
Cc: c...
Sent: Monday, January 1, 2007 10:27:03 PM
Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
Oghab-
> I want to use C6713 to implement an Optical Character Recognition system. Do
> you think that using the DSK makes the process faster than using for example
> MATLAB for this project?
A DSP-based DSK board could make some functions / blocks faster. But time taken to
move data between MATLAB and the board using RTDX will tend to cancel out speed
advantages of the DSP.
The main reasons for using a DSK board are a) if the project objective is create a
DSP based product, or b) to learn about DSP. In that case, being able to test and
debug DSP code step-by-step is a great advantage, saving a lot of time and allowing
DSP results to be compared with MATLAB results at any point along the way.
For image processing applications, a DSK 6416 or EVM 6455 board would be much more
suitable than the DSK 6713 -- much faster, as well as better supported by TI for
image processing.
-Jeff

I am sorry, C6714 was a typo, what I meant was 6416, I am a little bit panic these days never mind :)
So what you mean is 6416 has some advantages over PC, can you please tell me what are the advantages of using 6416 over PC.

Thank you,

Heidar
----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Brower
To: Heidar Mhr
Cc: c...
Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 6:53:11 PM
Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing

Heidar-
> Your guess is right because this is my first project with
> 6713 board. What I initially thought was if I do this project
> on DSP board it will result in a faster performance! Then
> according to what you said there is no advantage of using
> any of the TI DSP boards for implementing this project(even
> C6714)? If the answer is yes, then I should probably look
> for a different project for my final year projec:)
What I said was:
-don't use 6713 board, for several reasons
-use 6416 DSK or EVM DM642 board to have some advantage
over PC with good academic availability at reasonable
cost
The 6416 DSK has 1 GHz 6416 device, the EVM DM642 has 720 MHz DM642 plus analog video I/O.
There is no '6714'. C6713 is an old chip and slow (300 MHz). Just because you have a DSK 6713 board on hand does not mean it should be used for a year 2007 image processing student project.
-Jeff

----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Brower
To: Heidar Mhr
Cc: c...
Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 1:53:59 PM
Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
Heidar Mhr-
> Thanks for your kind response. I am more familiar with MATLAB and it
> won't be so difficult to implement it in MATLAB but my goal is to use
> the DSP board to implement an OCR. By being faster, I didn't mean
> faster to develop but I meant faster performance (i.e. faster
> recognition and execution) than MATLAB.
300 MHz 6713 won't be faster than a 2+ GHz PC running MATLAB.
> If I do it in MATLAB then I will have to re-write the whole thing
> again in C that is why I decided to do it on board from the beginning.
You can go straight for the DSP board implementation, but you sound inexperienced. If you try to get such a complex algorithm running on 6713 board from scratch, my guess is it will take you several months and even then you could still have problems.
> And since I don't have C6716, is it possible to implement it in 6713
> and then transfer it to 6714 later easily?
There are two major problems with using 6713 for image/video processing:
-TI doesn't have optimized image processing functions
available for 6713
-when you try to get help on the tech groups, you will
be doing your project "weird" compared to your peers,
who will not be inclined to help
I suggest you start by showing that you can solve engineering type problems, which include finding the correct resources. If this is a Univ project then you should have no problem to locate a DSK 6416 (or possibly EVM DM642) board. You should start asking around, including Professors, colleagues, TI sales, etc. If this is a commercial project, then the cost of DSK 6416 is very low and should not be an obstacle.
-Jeff
----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Brower
To: Heidar Mhr
Cc: c...
Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 12:00:05 PM
Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
Heidar Mhr-
> Thank you for your reply. I don't want to use the RTDX but I want
> to directly implement the project on the board (write C code). In
> this case do you think it will be faster than using MATLAB for such
> a project? I have worked with 6713 and don't know much about 6416.
> Will be waiting for your reply.
Faster to develop? If you are inexperienced, then it would be faster to get it working in MATLAB first and understand the algorithm, then get it working on a DSP board. Otherwise you could easily get the algorithm design "bent out of shape" due to difficulties with understanding embedded system issues such as I/O interfaces, memory allocation, cache, DMA, efficient use of MAC units, etc.
As for 6713 vs. 6416, I would strongly urge you *not* to use 6713 for a new design involving image processing. TI has shown no inclination to increase clock rate or performance of the basic chip core for their 67xx floating-point processors now for almost 5 years. Their emphasis has been on the 64xx series of devices.
-Jeff

----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Brower
To: Oghab
Cc: c...
Sent: Monday, January 1, 2007 10:27:03 PM
Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
Oghab-
> I want to use C6713 to implement an Optical Character Recognition system. Do
> you think that using the DSK makes the process faster than using for example
> MATLAB for this project?
A DSP-based DSK board could make some functions / blocks faster. But time taken to
move data between MATLAB and the board using RTDX will tend to cancel out speed
advantages of the DSP.
The main reasons for using a DSK board are a) if the project objective is create a
DSP based product, or b) to learn about DSP. In that case, being able to test and
debug DSP code step-by-step is a great advantage, saving a lot of time and allowing
DSP results to be compared with MATLAB results at any point along the way.
For image processing applications, a DSK 6416 or EVM 6455 board would be much more
suitable than the DSK 6713 -- much faster, as well as better supported by TI for
image processing.
-Jeff

Mr. Jeff Brower,

Thanks for your kind response. I am more familiar with MATLAB and it won't be so difficult to implement it in MATLAB but my goal is to use the DSP board to implement an OCR. By being faster, I didn't mean faster to develop but I meant faster performance (i.e. faster recognition and execution) than MATLAB. If I do it in MATLAB then I will have to re-write the whole thing again in C that is why I decided to do it on board from the beginning.

And since I don't have C6716, is it possible to implement it in 6713 and then transfer it to 6714 later easily?

Thank you,
Heidar
----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Brower
To: Heidar Mhr
Cc: c...
Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 12:00:05 PM
Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing

Heidar Mhr-
> Thank you for your reply. I don't want to use the RTDX but I want
> to directly implement the project on the board (write C code). In
> this case do you think it will be faster than using MATLAB for such
> a project? I have worked with 6713 and don't know much about 6416.
> Will be waiting for your reply.
Faster to develop? If you are inexperienced, then it would be faster to get it working in MATLAB first and understand the algorithm, then get it working on a DSP board. Otherwise you could easily get the algorithm design "bent out of shape" due to difficulties with understanding embedded system issues such as I/O interfaces, memory allocation, cache, DMA, efficient use of MAC units, etc.
As for 6713 vs. 6416, I would strongly urge you *not* to use 6713 for a new design involving image processing. TI has shown no inclination to increase clock rate or performance of the basic chip core for their 67xx floating-point processors now for almost 5 years. Their emphasis has been on the 64xx series of devices.
-Jeff

----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Brower
To: Oghab
Cc: c...
Sent: Monday, January 1, 2007 10:27:03 PM
Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
Oghab-
> I want to use C6713 to implement an Optical Character Recognition system. Do
> you think that using the DSK makes the process faster than using for example
> MATLAB for this project?
A DSP-based DSK board could make some functions / blocks faster. But time taken to
move data between MATLAB and the board using RTDX will tend to cancel out speed
advantages of the DSP.
The main reasons for using a DSK board are a) if the project objective is create a
DSP based product, or b) to learn about DSP. In that case, being able to test and
debug DSP code step-by-step is a great advantage, saving a lot of time and allowing
DSP results to be compared with MATLAB results at any point along the way.
For image processing applications, a DSK 6416 or EVM 6455 board would be much more
suitable than the DSK 6713 -- much faster, as well as better supported by TI for
image processing.
-Jeff

Jeff,

Thank you for your reply. I don't want to use the RTDX but I want to directly implement the project on the board (write C code). In this case do you think it will be faster than using MATLAB for such a project? I have worked with 6713 and don't know much about 6416. Will be waiting for your reply.

Thank you
----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Brower
To: Oghab
Cc: c...
Sent: Monday, January 1, 2007 10:27:03 PM
Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
Oghab-

> I want to use C6713 to implement an Optical Character Recognition system. Do
> you think that using the DSK makes the process faster than using for example
> MATLAB for this project?

A DSP-based DSK board could make some functions / blocks faster. But time taken to
move data between MATLAB and the board using RTDX will tend to cancel out speed
advantages of the DSP.

The main reasons for using a DSK board are a) if the project objective is create a
DSP based product, or b) to learn about DSP. In that case, being able to test and
debug DSP code step-by-step is a great advantage, saving a lot of time and allowing
DSP results to be compared with MATLAB results at any point along the way.

For image processing applications, a DSK 6416 or EVM 6455 board would be much more
suitable than the DSK 6713 -- much faster, as well as better supported by TI for
image processing.

-Jeff

Heidar Mhr-

> Thanks for your kind response. I am more familiar with MATLAB and it
> won't be so difficult to implement it in MATLAB but my goal is to use
> the DSP board to implement an OCR. By being faster, I didn't mean
> faster to develop but I meant faster performance (i.e. faster
> recognition and execution) than MATLAB.

300 MHz 6713 won't be faster than a 2+ GHz PC running MATLAB.

> If I do it in MATLAB then I will have to re-write the whole thing
> again in C that is why I decided to do it on board from the beginning.

You can go straight for the DSP board implementation, but you sound inexperienced.
If you try to get such a complex algorithm running on 6713 board from scratch, my
guess is it will take you several months and even then you could still have problems.

> And since I don't have C6716, is it possible to implement it in 6713
> and then transfer it to 6714 later easily?

There are two major problems with using 6713 for image/video processing:

-TI doesn't have optimized image processing functions
available for 6713

-when you try to get help on the tech groups, you will
be doing your project "weird" compared to your peers,
who will not be inclined to help

I suggest you start by showing that you can solve engineering type problems, which
include finding the correct resources. If this is a Univ project then you should
have no problem to locate a DSK 6416 (or possibly EVM DM642) board. You should start
asking around, including Professors, colleagues, TI sales, etc. If this is a
commercial project, then the cost of DSK 6416 is very low and should not be an
obstacle.

-Jeff

> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jeff Brower
> To: Heidar Mhr
> Cc: c...
> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2007 12:00:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
>
> Heidar Mhr-
>
> > Thank you for your reply. I don't want to use the RTDX but I want
> > to directly implement the project on the board (write C code). In
> > this case do you think it will be faster than using MATLAB for such
> > a project? I have worked with 6713 and don't know much about 6416.
> > Will be waiting for your reply.
>
> Faster to develop? If you are inexperienced, then it would be faster to get it
> working in MATLAB first and understand the algorithm, then get it working on a DSP
> board. Otherwise you could easily get the algorithm design "bent out of shape" due
> to difficulties with understanding embedded system issues such as I/O interfaces,
> memory allocation, cache, DMA, efficient use of MAC units, etc.
>
> As for 6713 vs. 6416, I would strongly urge you *not* to use 6713 for a new design
> involving image processing. TI has shown no inclination to increase clock rate or
> performance of the basic chip core for their 67xx floating-point processors now for
> almost 5 years. Their emphasis has been on the 64xx series of devices.
>
> -Jeff
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Jeff Brower
>> To: Oghab
>> Cc: c...
>> Sent: Monday, January 1, 2007 10:27:03 PM
>> Subject: Re: [c6x] Using C6713 for image processing
>> Oghab-
>>
>> > I want to use C6713 to implement an Optical Character Recognition system. Do
>> > you think that using the DSK makes the process faster than using for example
>> > MATLAB for this project?
>>
>> A DSP-based DSK board could make some functions / blocks faster. But time taken
>> to
>> move data between MATLAB and the board using RTDX will tend to cancel out speed
>> advantages of the DSP.
>>
>> The main reasons for using a DSK board are a) if the project objective is create
>> a
>> DSP based product, or b) to learn about DSP. In that case, being able to test
>> and
>> debug DSP code step-by-step is a great advantage, saving a lot of time and
>> allowing
>> DSP results to be compared with MATLAB results at any point along the way.
>>
>> For image processing applications, a DSK 6416 or EVM 6455 board would be much
>> more
>> suitable than the DSK 6713 -- much faster, as well as better supported by TI for
>> image processing.
>>
>> -Jeff
>>