Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Assembled Minimig v1.1, larger FPGA (BGA-package)  (Read 10954 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Belial6

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 568
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.glasshead.net
Re: Assembled Minimig v1.1, larger FPGA (BGA-package)
« on: September 04, 2007, 07:55:15 PM »
I might be interested based on cost.  I already have an order with Xenepp, so, price will be a factor.  The v1.1 from Xenepp will get me started, but the added expandability of the larger BGA has interest for future updates.  I wouldn't be entirely against buying one if a larger run would reduce the manufacturing cost, so that those that will be doing updates can more easily afford them.

I do think it would be a good idea if a model naming scheme could be implemented so that we could easily keep track of what is what.  

I started a  MiniMig Model Name thread
 

Offline Belial6

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 568
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.glasshead.net
A stupid question?
« Reply #1 on: September 07, 2007, 08:32:05 PM »
OK, maybe this is a stupid idea, but what about having the BGA FPGA put onto a daughter card, so that other revisions of the MiniMig could use the same FPGA without the BGA worries?  Are the electrical tolerances to tight for that? :crazy:

Of course I certainly don't want to discourage a run of fully factory assembled MiniMigs! :-D
 

Offline Belial6

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 568
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.glasshead.net
Re: A stupid question?
« Reply #2 on: September 07, 2007, 09:23:06 PM »
Is it only a cost issue, or is there a technical reason?

I do understand that cost matters, so I'm not trying to persuade you to change your mind.
 

Offline Belial6

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 568
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.glasshead.net
Re: Assembled Minimig v1.1, larger FPGA (BGA-package)
« Reply #3 on: September 08, 2007, 04:57:55 AM »
@freqmax:
I think there is some confusion.  In never suggested a second FPGA.  That was suggested by ThomasML.  I was just asking if there was a technical reason to have any FPGA soldered directly on the board.  It seems that it is only a cost issue.

My original thought was that since the BGA package of the larger, more powerful FPGAs is the biggest limiting factor on some of the enhancements some people are considering, maybe having a board with nothing but the FPGA and a connector would make sense.  This would allow larger more powerful FPGAs to be used in multiple designs, without every hardware revision having to be factory assembled.

ThomasML implied that this would be cost prohibitive.  Thus answering my question.  He also added that he is considering at a later date, working on a slot to add a second FPGA.  While this was not an answer to the question I was asking, it was interesting none the less.