From: email@example.com (carltons)
Subject: Re: Xilinx vs Altera
User-Agent: NewsWatcher-X 2.2.3b2
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 21:07:24 GMT
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 21:07:24 GMT
In article , Simon
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2002 15:27:14 GMT, firstname.lastname@example.org (carltons) wrote:
> >In article , Uwe Bonnes
> > wrote:
> >> abdou wrote:
> >> : Hi
> >> : Does someone know what's the difference between this 2 technologies?
> >> : And how can i find docomentation for that?
> >> Get the datasheets, get application notes and design manual, read
> >> them, strip out marketing speak, look for parts availability and make up
> >> your mind.
> >> Bye
> >I think both use the same technologies. You probably should concern
> >yourself with development tools and capabilities of the various chips as
> >related to your requirements. Evaluation boards make life good, so use
> >this as a gauge. If you are going to be going portable then worry about
> >current drain and voltage capability also.
> >I've dealt only with Altera and their support was quite good. I'm sure
> >that Xilinx is equally as good as I've heard good about both of them.
> >Steve WB4CZR
> Isn't one dynamic and one static?
The question should be, "Does this matter in this design?". I have no
idea as to the application that this is going to be used at this point.
The Altera part that I was using had some serial EEROM to reprogram the
FPGA if you lost power. BTW, I'm an EE, but was doing this project for a
digital engineer as he needed an analog designer with pcb layout
abilities. I used the 652 pin BGA 600,000 gate Altera part, but this was
2.5 years ago.