[sdiy] Proposed DSP board

[Tim Ressel]

I think he means a fixed application like a digital receiver where you are doing the same smallish function but need to do it on 1,024 channels. Having 32 MAC units in parallel gets it done that much faster.

Truth be told, the Nord type application doesn't need that much actual DSP, and could probably be done on an ARM. The DSPs bring other things to the party that are handy. The dsPIC has an interface designed for talking to codecs, thus offloading this from the uP (and the designer). I've chosen to offload the housekeeping stuff to a co-uP to maximize the processing power devoted to synth processing.

--TimR


--- On Thu, 1/22/09, Jason Tribbeck <Jason.Tribbeck at ascom.com> wrote:

> From: Jason Tribbeck <Jason.Tribbeck at ascom.com>
> Subject: RE: [sdiy] Proposed DSP board
> To: music.maker at gte.net, synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> Date: Thursday, January 22, 2009, 9:13 AM
> Scott Gravenhorst wrote:
> 
> > Neil Johnson <neil.johnson97 at ntlworld.com>
> wrote:
> > >FPGA is good for parallelizable algorithms, and
> where the design is
> mostly
> > fixed.
> > 
> > Can you explain what you mean by "mostly
> fixed" ?
> 
> I'm guessing "Fixed point".
> -- 
> Jason Tribbeck
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy