I almost lost the hope for DSP! Who can help me?

Jeff,

I'd like to 2nd your comments regarding high performance floating
point. The C6727 does not offer obvious improvements over the 6713 for us,
so we have stuck with the C6713. We would love to see a doubling of the
clock rate + Linux.

- Andrew E

----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Brower
To: William C Bonner
Cc: c...
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 1:47:21 PM
Subject: Re: [c6x] I almost lost the hope for DSP! Who can help me?

Wim-

> Jeff Brower wrote:
> >> Recendly, I test the speed of C6713 (-255MHZ) with following
simple program:
> >> /*****/
> >> int m1, m2, m3;
> >> void main
> >> {
> >> m1 = 312;
> >> m2 = 4536;
> >> for (i=0;i<30000;i++)
> >> for (j=0;j<3000;j++)
> >> {
> >> m3 = m1/m2;
> >> m3 = m1*m2;
> >> m3 = m1+m2;
> >> m3 = m1-m2;};
> >> }
> >> It spend about 34 seconds. If I run above program on my PC(CPU=AMD
3000+ 1.8GHz), IT SPEND ABOUT 4 SECONDS.
> >> The C6713 is slower than PC about 10 times! I almost lost the hope
for DSP!
> >> May be: C6416 or other is fast, Because I only have C6713, Are
there any man help me to test above program?
> >> Thank all;
> >>
> >
> > The C6713 is six (6) years old. At 300 MHz and 4 parallel MAC,
it's 6x slower than
> > new C6x devices. Compared to TCI6486 (6 core), it's 18x slower.
> >
> >
> Does TI make a drop in replacement for the 6713 that takes advantage
of
> the last five years of speed improvements? The board I'm using has
an
> environmentally extended 6713 running at 200MHz. I'm using the
floating
> point features of the DSP. Unfortunately right now I'm not in a
> position to have a new board laid out for me with all the RF data
> acquisition that I need, but it would be good to have an idea how I
> should think about moving to new platforms.

Unfortunately not. There is the 672x family, but it's not
pin-compatible and does
not offer a performance increase.

There has to be literally 1000s of frustrated TI floating-point
customers who wish
there was a 1 GHz version of the 6713 and a "C67+" core, tracking the
improvements
made for C64x devices. My guess is that TI has simply not seen the
volume on the
6713 that would justify further investment.

In my opinion, this is partly attributable to TI's reluctance to
embrace Linux. If
they had native, TI-developed and supported Linux running on the 6713
(this assumes a
version of the chip with sufficient onchip mem + cache and DDR2 SDRAM
support) they
would be competing effectively with x86 systems for low-power, small
form-factor
embedded applications. It's not good they gave away that market
segment to Via,
National Semi, AMD, etc. Now I hear that Intel is getting back in it
with something
called Topolai, a Pentium-M SoC.

-Jeff

____________________________________________________________________________________


____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs Start a New Thread