SOLVED: Houston, we have a problem... The New P2 doesn't fit.
Cluso99
Posts: 18,069
UPDATE: Problem solved - P2 can use larger die if necessary.
I have done some silicon calculations based on a number of previous die sizes posted by chip.
Hopefully I have missed something big somewhere, because by my calculations it doesn't fit the available silicon space.
38.400 mm2 = die space available inside i/o pin ring
25.100 mm2 = 512KB Hub
13.300 mm2 = die space remaining
0.372 mm2 = 2KB 2-port cog ram
0.372 mm2 = cog logic (chip said same as memory space)
0.186mm2 = 1KB LUT 1-port
0.930mm2 = total cog space
x16 cogs
15.880mm2 = 16 cogs
0.744mm2 = cog space without LUT
x2.5 space required for new hub interface - fromChip a few days ago
1.580mm2
15.880mm2 = 16 cogs
17.730mm2
But we only have 13.300mm2 available, 4.4mm2 short. That is almost 100KB of hub space.
I truly hope I have missed something here.
I have done some silicon calculations based on a number of previous die sizes posted by chip.
Hopefully I have missed something big somewhere, because by my calculations it doesn't fit the available silicon space.
38.400 mm2 = die space available inside i/o pin ring
25.100 mm2 = 512KB Hub
13.300 mm2 = die space remaining
0.372 mm2 = 2KB 2-port cog ram
0.372 mm2 = cog logic (chip said same as memory space)
0.186mm2 = 1KB LUT 1-port
0.930mm2 = total cog space
x16 cogs
15.880mm2 = 16 cogs
0.744mm2 = cog space without LUT
x2.5 space required for new hub interface - fromChip a few days ago
1.580mm2
15.880mm2 = 16 cogs
17.730mm2
But we only have 13.300mm2 available, 4.4mm2 short. That is almost 100KB of hub space.
I truly hope I have missed something here.
Comments
Yep, CORDIC and big multiplier.
I was meaning more space, not less space
This just makes it worse unless Chip included it as what he has to do in cog logic, because I included that he expected cog logic to grow to match the cog ram space.
Heart attack avoided.
Surely the 1KB would be 1/4 the size of the 2KB 2-port cog ram?
Hmm...more smart pins or a standard port? Well, guess that could be revisited after some FPGA-based testing. Never satisfied, are they!
Wonder what changed in terms of package flexibility. Something about outer ring design (I originally wrote "process," but I don't know how that could affect things) or just found an alternative package solution and/or package house at the right price (or are willing to pay more)? Anyway, not important.