1 of 1 people found this helpful
Only looking at the number of IOs, the AU10P, AU15P and AU20P might be footprint compatible.
If possible I would have the standard board with the smallest device to make it interesting for most interested parties and have an option to drop in the larger ones for customers, who need them and would pay for them.
I appreciated the feedback Wolf!
Yes that's an excellent point you made.
Yes, the device that has the best options to learn and evaluate on a budget. While allowing the manufacturer an upgrade path with little redesign.
Personally, I prefer evaluation boards that expose as much as possible of the pins, uncommitted. Not too much prededicated connectors, buttons, LEDs.
How about a moderately complex board? There are not a lot of FPGA boards with PCI-E, an m.2 interface, and LVDS capable I/O. I would love to see a board that can interface with an ADC, DAC, (each needing 10-16 pairs of LVDS) and be able to store it via m.2 SSD, and send it to a computer via PCI-E while having a lower cost FPGA.
I agree with Wolfgang that having a compatible footprint allows for low cost or higher functionality depending on needs. And, I agree with Jan that a lot of buttons and LEDs don't allow for flexibility.
@ spinden The Artix Ultra Scale+ FPGAs are not what most would consider cheap.
You could do everything you mention (except m.2) with a Lattice Versa board with an ECP5 FPGA ($274for the board.)
I haven't seen any prices for the AUxxP parts - the cheapest Kintex UltraScale FPGA on Farnel is £830 ish (just the chip).
The AUxxP s should be cheaper but they won't be close to the £28 you would pay for an LFE5U-85F-6BG554C at Mouser (and they have stock too !!).
The AU10P is a great part - it has 400 DSP slices and 12 x 16Gbit serial interface ports, It's just way more than you need for a DAQ system.
To get to know it,
I'd vote for simplicity, config memory, DDRAM and power conversion (so it needs only single DC supply) and ALL the other pins broken out to connector footprints.
The only other feature (I can think of) that would be worth using up more pins would be a Gbit Ethernet Phy and connector.
If you had to choose a Artix Ultrascale+ device to be placed on a development kit which device would you have most interest in. Please keep in mind the larger devices will drive higher costs. Any feedback is appreciated. https://www.xilinx.com/products/silicon-devices/fpga/artix-ultrascale-plus.html#productTable
Would your interest be in more of a low cost entry level board or a high end more costly fully featured development kit?