Re: never enough
> Hi MISC readers,
>
> Wayne Morellini wrote:
>
> > Well I have to hand it to Dr Ting he is comming through, good on him! I
> > actualy suggested to Chuck that a 24-bit design was better than a 20-bit
> > design in 1988.
Visit www.ultratechnology.com and find one of the original articles why they
chose 20 bit.
> I still consider going to FPGA a step backwards. Chuck decided to go
> from PGA to custom silicon in 1989 to get an order of magnitude or
> two speedup and two orders of magnitude improvement in production
> cost. This is a 1000/1 or 10,000/1 ratio in price performance.
> It is a very big hit to take. The only justification that I can
> see would be not having enough money for custom which is more
> expensive. But the 1,000/1 or 10,000/1 ratio is hard to ignore.
Yea... doesn't that evade the purpose of the minimal instruction set
architecture?
> The idea of the F21 design is to get a few hundred mips per megaword
> of memory or per 32K words or memory depending on the configuration
> of nodes. So for 32MB of memory you might get a few hundred billion
> instructions per second. To attach that much memory to one CPU looks
> like a bottleneck from our standpoint but if all you want is to
> control a 3D chip...
That would be a sweet system. :0)
> > I actually was meaning to send you some names of new video compression
stuff
> > so that you could put the lot on one DVD, or send it over the net.
>
> People have suggest that I need a new camcorder as my old one has worn
> out from making tapes and copies. People have suggested that I need to
> buy newer and better compression equipment. People have suggest that
> I need to upgrade my website and pay ten times as much for a site
Videos on DVD would be nice, but I wouldn't sell them for any less than $300
a piece.
> that can hold gigabytes and provide more streaming video bandwidth
> for users. These are all nice ideas. But who is paying for it?
He is of course. ;0)
