3 ms·

> I'd also vote for an FPGA Mainboard, ideally Lattice, ideally iCE40 That wouldn't be usable as the main board of a laptop. The iCE40 series consists entirel

> I'd also vote for an FPGA Mainboard, ideally Lattice, ideally iCE40 That wouldn't be usable as the main board of a laptop. The iCE40 series consists entirely of small, low-power FPGAs. They're neither large nor fast, and they don't have a lot of I/Os. They can fit a soft core CPU, but with little room to spare, no external memory controller, and at a relatively low Fmax (like, maybe 50 MHz with a lucky P&R run). They're neat parts, but this isn't what they're for. The ECP5 series (also Lattice) might be somewhat more suitable, but it's still no replacement for a fixed-function CPU. Reconfigurability comes with a dramatic penalty to speed and power consumption. > able to run all sorts of "soft" CPUs on it, including (but not limited to) the following: For what it's worth, OpenCores is basically a junkyard. Most of what you see there is abandoned and barely functional, if at all.

jychang 3y ago
Yes but when is apple going to release the iFPGA?
- duskwuff 3y ago
  Technically, they already did: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MW682AM/A/apple-afterburner-card https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MW682AM/A/apple-afterburn... Under the hood, it's a Xilinx Ultrascale+ (XCKU15P) FPGA on a card.
metalforever 3y ago
I think they meant the supplemental processing. I am also looking for this FPGA solution.
maven29 3y ago
East asian vendors like Efinix seem to have high spec parts (with LPDDR4, PCIE4) at low prices and actual availability, without the ITAR troubles you see with US parts.
peter_d_sherman 3y ago
duskwuff: I'm more than happy to let you have your ideal laptop, with the fastest, latest most cutting-edge Intel or AMD chip... Why won't you let me have my ideal laptop -- with an iCE40 FPGA? My value system is that of simplicity, verifyability, transparency, open hardware -- and open software of all layers of the computing stack... I don't care about MHz, 50 is plenty -- if that's what it takes to get all of the above. If there's another FPGA which is faster yet still compatible with all open source tools, feel free to name it (and give an URL to the open source toolchain for it). At present, I am not aware of one... >For what it's worth, OpenCores is basically a junkyard. For what it's worth, most commercial CPUs are basically transparency trainwrecks. Also, I'd leave it to each individual reader to make their own determination if OpenCores has value to them or not. Some will not understand its whyness and thus not value it. But I'd rather let it be their own individual choice. Also, you should know that many individuals put a lot of their own unpaid hard work into their projects on OpenCores. A lot of blood, sweat and tears. A lot of hard work, unpaid hard work -- to donate the results of that hard work to the community. Painting OpenCores with a broad brush and broadly labeling OpenCores as "Most of what you see there is abandoned and barely functional" greatly disparages the work, the hard work of all of the people who put their blood sweat and tears into their projects there. Many OpenCores projects are complete, do work, and are models, absolutely stellar models of transparency and individual and community effort. I know that I for one value OpenCores and the work of everyone involved greatly, greatly. Have you personally tested each and every project on OpenCores? If you haven't -- then how do you presume to know the value? Have you personally downloaded and tested even one complete project from OpenCores? ? OpenCores has information which tells you if a project is complete or not, if it is working or not, and which phase of development it is in... one wouldn't select an unfinished project unless one were interested in learning from it and/or helping to complete it... Point is -- some of us (and this would include EE students and others potentially interested in CPU/Processor design, other present/future chip designers and educators and the like) -- would see value, great value in OpenCores... Again, you are free to have your ideal laptop, with the fastest, latest most cutting-edge Intel or AMD chip, or whatever you want, with whatever components you want... I would politely ask for the reciprocal grant of freedom in selecting my ideal laptop, with my ideal components, inside of the value system I have explained, above.

jychang 3y ago

Yes but when is apple going to release the iFPGA?

duskwuff 3y ago
Technically, they already did: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MW682AM/A/apple-afterburner-card https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MW682AM/A/apple-afterburn... Under the hood, it's a Xilinx Ultrascale+ (XCKU15P) FPGA on a card.

metalforever 3y ago

I think they meant the supplemental processing. I am also looking for this FPGA solution.

maven29 3y ago

East asian vendors like Efinix seem to have high spec parts (with LPDDR4, PCIE4) at low prices and actual availability, without the ITAR troubles you see with US parts.

peter_d_sherman 3y ago

duskwuff: I'm more than happy to let you have your ideal laptop, with the fastest, latest most cutting-edge Intel or AMD chip... Why won't you let me have my ideal laptop -- with an iCE40 FPGA? My value system is that of simplicity, verifyability, transparency, open hardware -- and open software of all layers of the computing stack... I don't care about MHz, 50 is plenty -- if that's what it takes to get all of the above. If there's another FPGA which is faster yet still compatible with all open source tools, feel free to name it (and give an URL to the open source toolchain for it). At present, I am not aware of one... >For what it's worth, OpenCores is basically a junkyard. For what it's worth, most commercial CPUs are basically transparency trainwrecks. Also, I'd leave it to each individual reader to make their own determination if OpenCores has value to them or not. Some will not understand its whyness and thus not value it. But I'd rather let it be their own individual choice. Also, you should know that many individuals put a lot of their own unpaid hard work into their projects on OpenCores. A lot of blood, sweat and tears. A lot of hard work, unpaid hard work -- to donate the results of that hard work to the community. Painting OpenCores with a broad brush and broadly labeling OpenCores as "Most of what you see there is abandoned and barely functional" greatly disparages the work, the hard work of all of the people who put their blood sweat and tears into their projects there. Many OpenCores projects are complete, do work, and are models, absolutely stellar models of transparency and individual and community effort. I know that I for one value OpenCores and the work of everyone involved greatly, greatly. Have you personally tested each and every project on OpenCores? If you haven't -- then how do you presume to know the value? Have you personally downloaded and tested even one complete project from OpenCores? ? OpenCores has information which tells you if a project is complete or not, if it is working or not, and which phase of development it is in... one wouldn't select an unfinished project unless one were interested in learning from it and/or helping to complete it... Point is -- some of us (and this would include EE students and others potentially interested in CPU/Processor design, other present/future chip designers and educators and the like) -- would see value, great value in OpenCores... Again, you are free to have your ideal laptop, with the fastest, latest most cutting-edge Intel or AMD chip, or whatever you want, with whatever components you want... I would politely ask for the reciprocal grant of freedom in selecting my ideal laptop, with my ideal components, inside of the value system I have explained, above.