Forums

After the Tiger Sharc what's next?

Started by jjli...@hotmail.com February 28, 2008
I know that I am digressing here w.r.t original posting.

> Its 0.6 to 2W for a relatively slow device. I don't see what makes that > interesting against a dedicated DSP chip.
In some applications one could use something like Atom for handling both control and signal processing functions.
> Medical imaging is > Ease of development sensitive > Not too power or cost sensitive > Not too space sensitive > With the floating point capabilities of a current Pentium, basing all > image processing on either FPGA solutions or Pentium/Athlon off the > shelf boards makes perfect sense. I don't see things like base stations > going that way any time soon. >
I agree. However, if Analog Devices & TI stop improving (power, cost, performance) their floating point lines and we see Intel/AMD making continuous improvements then we will begin to a see a shift in other industries as well. It is somewhat disappointing that AD hasn't shown us much since TigerSHARC.
> > The new OMAP emphasises a fast Cortex applications processor. The > DaVinci emphasises the DSP power for things like video. I'm not sure I > see too much common ground there. >
I think there will be flavors of OMAP AND DaVinci sporting both Cortex and 64x+. Wouldn't it make sense if TI employs the similar SCR and EDMA structures in both devices? So, the distinction will be mostly in the set of peripheral ports and on-chip accelerators. Just a speculation ...
> > I wonder if that is the day when all innovation will cease in the world > of signal processing? :-) >
Code generators and compilers will rule the world!
UglanceIcatch wrote:
...
> I haven't looked into this much. One of my colleagues' dream is that > some day all real-time signal processing code will be written in > Matlab. (Too bad, Mathworks is not a public company ;))
I'm predicting that it'll be written in .net first. D'ya think it's too late to buy stock in Microsoft? ;-) =g2 _____________________________________________________________________ Grant R. Griffin Publisher of dspGuru http://www.dspguru.com Iowegian International Corporation http://www.iowegian.com See http://www.iowegian.com/img/contact.gif for e-mail address
On Mar 6, 5:43 pm, Grant Griffin <nob...@example.com> wrote:
> > I'm predicting that it'll be written in .net first. D'ya think it's too > late to buy stock in Microsoft? ;-) >
I am sure you meant the Enterprise edition. There will be enough managed classes to take care of your problem. (I have to restrain myself from saying negative things about Micro$oft, the biggest "high- tech" employer in our neighborhood. Thanks to them our real-estate market is not doing too bad and Sonics may remain in Seattle). On Mar 4, 8:40 am, Steve Underwood <ste...@dis.org> wrote:
> Its 0.6 to 2W for a relatively slow device. I don't see what makes that > interesting against a dedicated DSP chip.
Isn't it faster than fastest floating point DSP given that it is likely to support SSE3 etc. ? I think a device like this is more suitable to play the dual role of system controller and signal processor - Native Signal Processing (NSP) for embedded applications?
> The new OMAP emphasises a fast Cortex applications processor. The > DaVinci emphasises the DSP power for things like video. I'm not sure I > see too much common ground there.
Given the information that is publicly available, OMAP and DaVinci are very different. For a programmer, the distinction will blur IF and when both have Cortex + 64x+, use the same mechanism for DMA and sharing on-chip resources (SCR). Time will tell ...