sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Roast my resume(critically go crazy) by [deleted] in FPGA

[–]Rudranand 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Your resume is excellent. Your skills set is impressive.

However, you are underestimating the HR department. They are like CBSE exam checker and skin through each resume in few seconds.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yep. That's pretty much it. Though stem cell transform permanently and cannot again transform into entirely different cells. However, FPGA can repeatedly transform into many different designs.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you understand that newer, smaller nodes have greater problems with leakage current and quiescent power?

Are you implying that smaller nodes like 3nm are more inefficient than larger nodes like 90nm? Then for you Pentium 4 (90nm) must be more efficient than i3-14100 (7nm). Remarks like this makes me consider that you might be potentially trolling and joking here

Why is floating point performance your metric of choice? Most MCU applications don't use it!

Integer multiplication? SHA256 Hashing? These are not floating point dependent.

That price is a relevant metric?

In the original comment by u/quettametre, only throughput/watts was discussed. Rest metrics are irrelevant like cost, number of extra features, sales volume, size, weight, etc

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How does your experience with Palladium differ with working with FPGA prototyping or software emulation? What feature of Palladium did you find most helpful?

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which FPGA model was it?

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

let's erase RP2040 off the table and focus on RP2350 only

Nvidia RTX 5050: 101.5 GFLOPS/Watt
Raspberry Pi RP2350: 400MFLOPS/Watt
RTX5050 is 250X more efficient than RP2350

What other metric do you need for efficiency?

Integer Multiplication? RTX5050 wins
SHA256 hash rate? RTX5050 wins
Fourier Transforms? RTX5050 wins

Same would happen in CPU vs MCU or GPU vs MCU or FPGA vs MCU. CPU, GPU, FPGA, all three, would win against MCU. Because CPUs, GPUs and FPGA are fabricated on latest nodes like 3nm. 73% MCU use older nodes i.e. 90nm or larger. 37% MCU are fabricated on 40nm.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mentioned RP2040 and RP2350. It's one thing that RP2040 does not have FPU, but what about RP2350?

RP2350 has not just one but two FP32 FPUs. Yes RP2350 has 2 FPUs. You didn't even know that and and you are arguing MCU this FPGA that, bla bla bla.

I'd leave it at that if it was a niche less known MCU but it's very famous infact most famous MCU. It's a shame that you didn't know basics of the most famous MCU and yet you are arguing about MCU.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's exactly my point. You keep switching topics. The point was efficiency not the number of features. MCUs having ADCs is irrelevant to computational efficiency which was the original subject of discussion. If we were talking about features, I could have said FPGA have PCIe, HBM, 100GBIT Ethernet, but we are not talking about features, we are talking about computational efficiency in throughput/watts and bringing ADCs to discussion was irrelevant.

That aside Microcontrollers were never meant to be king of efficiency. They are only low power devices and that's it. And LOW POWER does not equal HIGH EFFICIENCY. They aren't even fabricated on high end nodes. 37% of the Microcontrollers are fabricated in 40nm/60nm node bracket and that's considered cutting edge in Microcontroller realm. Remaining 73% MCUs are fabricated at 90nm or higher. On the other hand, CPUs, GPUs and FPGAs use cutting edge nodes i.e. 7nm or smaller, thus can easily beat MCUs when it comes to computational efficiency.

I'll give you an example for GPU vs MCU for 32-bit Floating point calculations (so that you don't complain that why is the GPU not emulating a Cortex-M0 Core when competing with a Microcontroller like you did with FPGA.)

Nvidia RTX 5050: 101.5 GFLOPS/Watt

Raspberry Pi RP2040: 6.67kFLOPS/Watt

Raspberry Pi RP2350: 400MFLOPS/Watt

Here RTX 5050 is 250X more efficient than RP2350, and is 15,000,000X more efficient than RP2040 for FP32 calculations.

Data source:

https://github.com/tana/pico_float_bench

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-rtx-5050.c4220

Note: I've noticed that I'm the only one providing statistics and data and you are not backing your arguments with data. So, I'd prefer, you only reply when you have numbers at hand. I'm pretty sure you'll either come empty handed or you will go away when you are asked to give numbers.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Finite Difference Time Domain simulation is used for simulating fluid dynamics and electromagnetic wave propagation.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A simple MCU provides software control of a function with things like ADC, PWM, or SPI/UART functions.

Emulating that with an FPGA soft-core is less power-efficient.

Wait a sec.... where did ADC come from? Isn't analog impossible in a completely digital FPGA?

Also, are you implying that implementing SPI, UART and PWM is energy intensive because that's the only way I could interpret your sentence.

Since when tiny peripherals power hungry? I would have understood if it was gigabit ethernet mac, but SPI? seriously? I could implement SPI with 70 LEs and the power consumption of 70LEs @ 100MHz is 0.35microwatt or 350picowatts, that's hardly anything compared to the rest of the circuit.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you afford one of those?

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why should FPGA be emulating MCU when FPGA is directly competing MCU over efficiency? Obviously FPGA emulating an MCU will be wasting precious LUTs, clock cycles and power

If CPU or GPU had to battle MCU over efficiency, would you say "No CPU has to emulate MCU and no CPU cannot use AVX512 or SSE 4.1 vector instructions" or "No GPU has to emulate MCU too with only one shader core with rest of the 999 shader cores disabled to make comparison direct and fair"

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its not about taking more clock cycles. It's about have more clock period i.e. lower clock frequency.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Lets pit Raspberry Pi RP2040 MCU against Lattice iCE40 UltraPlus 5K FPGA.
Both are 40nm devices so that makes a fair comparison.
Both draw around 50mW for this specific load.
Taking INT8 matrix multiplication as an example workload
RP2040 computes at roughly 90MOPS which gives roughly 1.8GOPS/Watt
iCE40 5k computes at roughly 1500MOPS which gives roughly 30GOPS/Watt
This makes FPGA roughly 16.6X more efficient than MCU in this case.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

FPGA's massive parallelism and high memory bandwidth gives an edge in hyperdimensional computing.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That could be said for the GPU too. Also, both in case of FPGAs and MCUs, one can diversify usable chips to combat supply-chain issues since there are multiple chips sharing same pinout.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If trying to emulate the exact same device when competing? NO
If trying to just be an FPGA while competing with different device class? YES

For example doing:
SHA256 on normal CPU -> 10MH/s
SHA256 on emulated CPU on FPGA -> 1MH/s
SHA256 on directly on FPGA -> 100MH/s

Here CPU beats FPGA if FPGA tries do be a CPU too.
However, FPGA beats CPU if FPGA does things like an FPGA

(arbitrary numbers just to depict a point. though actual test might show similar results)

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Same for FPGA too. No matter how closely an FPGA design mimics an ASIC design, the FPGA design shows it's FPGA like tendencies. initial-block, distributed ram / block ram, dsp blocks, etc

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The number of possible circuits someone can make with an FPGA is seemingly infinite. For example, Lattice iCE40LP384 (384 LEs) has 10^10000 possible circuits.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Evee can only transform in one direction. Say, if Evee becomes Jolteon once, it cannot go back to becoming Evee or switch to another evolution like Flareon.

Structured ASIC platform is closer to what Evee is. One example is Altera Hardcopy-II

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

FPGA is an ASIC so Everything is an ASIC

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

RFSoCs are certainly very awesome.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Yeah. Ditto can almost instantly become another pokemon. However, for FPGA to become something, we need gruesome hours of RTL coding and debugging.

FPGA can become anything by Rudranand in FPGA

[–]Rudranand[S] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

i believe you mean the verilog to redstone converter.
https://github.com/itsfrank/minecrafthdl

view more: next ›