From: Keith R. Williams
Subject: Re: Xilinx vs Altera
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 10:32:48 -0500
X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60
In article , st599
> 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?
No. They use quite similar technology. The features and tools
are quite different though. For such issues I'd hang around
comp.arch.fpga. That's where the experts are (and not just a few