FPGA for dummies

[amigadave]

Thanks for trying to correct those of who do the topic of this thread every day for over a decade.

There are no shortage of members here that like to post messages on how things work, when they have almost zero experience or knowledge on the topic.  I think I have even jumped into a thread or two to offer an opinion when I really should not have.  Something I didn't really know anything about, but just had to post an opinion on.  Just human nature when a thread is really interesting and we want to add our 2 cents.

Unfortunately, some people get so sucked into an argument and trying to express their opinions, they won't stop even after they realize they don't know what they are writing about.  These are the guys I don't understand.  I guess they just like to hear the sound of their own voices.

[amigadave]

Well, the discussion lead to me understanding things a little better than I had. One way to increase your understanding of something is to teach it, or in whatever way explain it to someone else. It also helps improve how I try to explain things, let alone what I understand of that.

With the few people in this thread that understand FPGA's better than the average bear, this is a good place to ask what the differences are between FPGA's and the XMOS programmable chips.

I know that the XMOS chips are programmed using the C programming language, or what they call XC, which I understand to be the C programming language with specific "X" extensions to it.  This differs with FPGA that use VHDL, or Verilog to program the gates in the FPGA.

Maybe someone here can explain in "Layman" terms that everyone can understand, what some of the differences are between FPGA and XMOS chips.

Now that I am getting an X1000, I have become more interested in learning more about XMOS and what they are doing and what is possible to accomplish with the XMOS chip and Xena slot that has been provided on the X1000.  There are some very interesting videos on their site, but I am still in need of more understanding of what XMOS is and what might be possible with it in the future.

I know a lot of people have criticized the inclusion of the XMOS chip as a gimmick on the X1000, but I don't see it that way at all.  I see it as a real opportunity for some innovation to occur in the near future and a possibility for some creative person to write software that will allow the X1000 and OS4 stand out from the mundane crowd of Windows PC's.

It is potential that can be tapped, or it can be just a useless addition to the X1000, but after looking at the XMOS site more, I am excited about the potential uses in the future.  I have always been interested in computer control of household devices, like lighting, automated use of other electronic devices, environment control, such as heating and cooling systems, and many other similar ideas.  The X1000 with the XMOS chip appears to be ideally suited to such control software.

[amigadave]

Since there were so many members here and elsewhere that were so quick to jump at criticizing A-Eon and Varisys's decision to include the XMOS chip on the Nemo motherboard for the X1000, I thought some of those same people would be able to comment on how they work and what the differences are between them and an FPGA.

Not saying that anyone in this thread was one of those people, but very likely that one or more of those critics is reading this thread.

From what I read at the XMOS site, there chips seem very interesting and the decision to make part of their work Open Source makes it even more interesting.

[amigadave]

I follow EE Journal they often discuss newest development in ASIC, FPGA and embedded. They have also an article on XMOS from a year or two ago here.

greets,
Staf.

Thanks Fats,

I am a little surprised that more people have not researched XCore and the XMOS chips in detail, since they are included in the newest flagship of the AmigaOne line.

I know not everyone can afford one, but I thought maybe some of the X1000 beta testers could comment on what the XMOS chips is and what it can and cannot do, without infringing on their NDA's with A-Eon.

Just a general statement or two about how they differ from FPGA's, since both appear to be programmable chips.  One using VHDL, or Verilog and the other using the "C" language with X extensions to program them.

I guess the people that know are too busy to be reading this thread.  I will have to do more research on my own, but was hoping one of the experts would chime in.

Where are you Steve Solie?  You might not be an expert on XMOS, but I'll bet you can shed some light on my questions.

[amigadave]

The XMOS chip is a CPU. It contains no programmable logic and is nothing at all like a FPGA.

Please elaborate!

That is not what I came to understand from my short read of their site, but then I am here asking for clarification, because I am not sure exactly what they are.

Are you saying that they are nothing more than a specialized CPU that runs modified "C" code?

At Wawrzon, I disagree.  Just because no one in the Amiga community has looked at these chips long enough to come up with a useful purpose yet, it does not mean that it won't happen.

The company would not still be in business if they were not producing something useful.  It is hard enough to stay in business when you make something that is useful and there are many examples on their site showing what the chip is capable of.  One item in particular that interested me (as an iPhone owner), is the iPhone dock that uses the exact same XMOS chip that is on the X1000 motherboard.

[amigadave]

"Proper Amiga", "Real Amiga", "True Amiga", "The Real Thing".  Oh wait, that last one is from a Coca Cola commercial.:roflmao:

These arguments from the "Faithful" about what is "Real" and what is a form of emulation are so ridiculous and narrow minded (and tiring).  If you want to follow their dogma to the letter then maybe everything that came after the A1000 should be considered emulation?  Or should we go back further and consider everything that came after the original prototype breadboards with the mass of wires that were used as a proof of concept before the custom chips were first fabricated, to be emulation as well.

Why can't the fanatics that try to turn this into a holy religion realize that there is no ONE definition of what a "Real" Amiga is anymore. Not even between the most hard core fanatics can they agree what is accepted as a "Real Amiga" and what is labeled as "Clone", "Emulation", "Copy", "The Evil Destroyer of Amiga", etc.

Stop wasting so much time and energy arguing what is what and enjoy which ever versions and flavors of the Amiga experience that you see value in.  I have been using the term Amiga inspired a lot lately, because I think that it fits my interests of all things that have their roots in the original Amiga.

Celebrate how much the Amiga has inspired so many different people in so many different ways and the profound effect it has had on all of us.  Celebrate how we are tied together, instead of focusing on how we are different and fighting with each other because we enjoy this inspiration differently.  We are all part of the greater Amiga community and should be proud that Jay's "Little Computer" continues to inspire so many people long after it has fallen out of production and lost all company support.