FPGA for dummies

[bloodline]

I find this philosophical argument about Emulation vs Real hardware equity funny.

Either via a software emulator or an FPGA, there is a recreation of the original functionality of the old chips. Neither is more "real" than the other and both "emulate" (meaning: appear to be like the original hardware from a user and software perspective) the Amiga.

For those unsure about FPGA chips, think of them as thousands of little 74xx chips in one package that can be connected anyway desired by software.

An FPGA allows a hardware designer to build his circuits in a single chip, rather than use lots of separate components all soldered together on a circuit board

[bloodline]

 
What it comes down to though, simulation and emulation is about recreating something. If you took a VHDL 68000 simulator and put it on a DIP carrier so it could plug into an Amiga then what would it be:
 
1. A 68000.
2. A simulation of a 68000.
 
This thread isn't the only place where simulation/emulation in hardware is mentioned. It has been common to use the terms even in fixed purpose hardware that behaves similar to other hardware.

It actually wouldn't matter... You could call it a purple teapot and claim that it orbits the sun somewhere between mars and Jupiter...

I fact how would you know if Freescale sold you a 68k, which worked fine in your A500... Was either an ASIC or an FPGA?

[bloodline]

thread:
So lets build a x86pc core for the Replay, then run UAE on it. What's that... simulation or emulation. ;-)

You know, I rather think that's a fun idea

[bloodline]

It can be as VHDL is just one of many functional programming languages that are designed for parallel processing. There are many other very similar languages used on PC's.
 
Whether your program is converted to X86, ARM, 68000 or FPGA is irrlevant to the process of writing the program.

I think you are getting confused, hardware description languages are not programming languages, despite their similar appearance... Both myself and Karlos had a look at one a few years back and struggled to follow what was going on... Very different conceptually!

-edit- I should add that both myself and Karlos are quite experienced with a number of programming languages, but neither of us have done any FPGA work (though I do a lot of electronics hobby work).

[bloodline]

If I've read the xmos specs right, it should be pretty good at allowing you to implement at run time, all manner of I/O... I'm not sure what use that really has for the desktop hobbyist, but I can see how it would be very useful for hardware dev and small industrial production runs.

[bloodline]

One  of the methods can adhere to the timing specification of the original design.

Not true, I could program a microcontroller to respond to signals correctly to replicate the functionality of an ASIC (in fact I have used an ATMega328 in place of some old custom chip before). As long as it meets the timing as documented it will work.

[bloodline]

I'm remembering in an interview that the AGA design had a few bugs in it that needed reworking on the motherboard (sorry can't remember te exact source right now)... But suffice to say, you wouldn't want the original logic network of the AGA... It would be better to use a new circuit built to the correct specification

[bloodline]

So does that mean AGA chipset emulates ECS and ECS emulates OCS ?

Sure, why not!? Merry Christmas...

Bit fed up with the religious wars... If it's not the original implementation, it's emulating the functionality of the original.

Why is emulation a "dirty word"? It's not, it's the future... Now lets get down to the important job of improving the quality of these FPGAs Amiga chipset emulation