Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
eASIC for P3 ??? — Parallax Forums

eASIC for P3 ???

Cluso99Cluso99 Posts: 18,069
in Propeller 2
An article for 28nm ASIC for FPGA replacement, NRE $400K including samples.
http://www.eejournal.com/archives/articles/20150901-easic/
~1.8M LUTs, 56Mb BlockRam and some eFuse storagefor keys.
Probably no ADC.

Imagine what Chip could do with this!!!

Perhaps the older 90nm may be cheaper and smaller.

Comments

  • markmark Posts: 252
    That's pretty clever! While it would probably work for a CPU, I'd imagine it's less than optimal. It seems like analog would be off the table as well. Also, there's no figure for unit price unfortunately. Still, I'd imagine there would be a decent sized market for such services.

    IIRC, Chip said 90nm would cost something like $120k, but I don't think that includes services like synthesis, place and route, and whatever else a company like Treehouse does.
  • koehlerkoehler Posts: 598

    By the time P3 comes around 2-3 years from now, I expect 90-65nm will be a distinct possibility.
    At some point, it would seem to almost become more cost prohibitive to continue running these really old processes when you can upgrade with someone else's old equipment they've set aside, and get 200-300% more parts for the same amount of silicon.

  • markmark Posts: 252
    If the P2 is going to be 180nm, then it would seem that the P3 would be 90nm at least.
  • AleAle Posts: 2,363
    They look like the old "Uncommitted logic array" oder ? but just Bigger Faster Smaller
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    mark wrote: »
    If the P2 is going to be 180nm, then it would seem that the P3 would be 90nm at least.

    Don't you mean 90nm at most ;-)
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    Ale wrote: »
    They look like the old "Uncommitted logic array" oder ? but just Bigger Faster Smaller

    Of course. May have improved logic blocks and such but what else could it be if one only needs to add the interconnect layer? Recycling an old idea using new technology can often produce great results.

  • markmark Posts: 252
    kwinn wrote: »
    mark wrote: »
    If the P2 is going to be 180nm, then it would seem that the P3 would be 90nm at least.

    Don't you mean 90nm at most ;-)
    You just exploded my brain, maaannn! Yes, you are correct. :)

  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    mark wrote: »
    kwinn wrote: »
    mark wrote: »
    If the P2 is going to be 180nm, then it would seem that the P3 would be 90nm at least.

    Don't you mean 90nm at most ;-)
    You just exploded my brain, maaannn! Yes, you are correct. :)

    Sorry Mark, I made a valiant effort but just could not resist.
Sign In or Register to comment.