Intel (Altera) announces Cyclone-10

It looks like Intel has learned to count from Microsoft. The previous
generation of Cyclone was Cyclone-5.
formatting link

--
Gabor
Reply to
GaborSzakacs
Loading thread data ...
Maybe they doubled the number because they're twice as good?
--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman
Cyclone 10 GX
"Twice higher performance than the previous generation of low cost FPGAs"
tee hee
Although it is interesting to note the GX (high performance) series has 8 input ALMs, 20 kb memory blocks, 27x27 bit multipliers, floating point multipliers, coefficient register banks, all in a 20 nm process while the LP series has 4 input LUTs, 9 kb memory blocks, 18x18 bit multipliers, no floating point or coefficient register banks and no statement of process. It would appear that to achieve low(er) power they opted for an older process, leveraging existing series of FPGAs for the LP series. Like a Cyclone V redo.
It would be interesting to see what sort of stack CPU could be made with the GX series. I wonder if the design software is out yet?
--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman
Looks to me like there is no support for these devices as yet.
They mention an M164 package which seems to be a type of BGA, but I can't find it in their package data sheet... or more accurately I can't find their package data sheet. I keep finding package info on "mature" devices or other obsolete sheets. I have a copy from 2007 which shows MBGA packages with 0.5 mm ball spacing, but the 164 pin part is not there. The really weird part is the package data sheets I can find list updates to add the M164 part, but it is nowhere to be found in the technical data. I guess they just copied the update table when they made the "mature device" data sheet. Even that is dated 2011. WTF!?
--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman
I think the numbering is the least concern with this "new" family (no surpr ise, as there is already Max 10, Arria 10 and Stratix 10 - with similar jum ps).
However, it is pretty obvious that: Cyclone 10 LP = Cyclone III / IV E Cyclone 10 GX = Arria 10 GX
(Such a strategy has long tradition for Altera, look at FLEX10K/ACEX1K, Cyc lone III/IV E, MAX II/V...)
It is mainly a marketing / pricing move, which of course is OK if there is pricing benefit for the customer. But I always found the way it was communi cated pretty misleading... (Very dishonest. Fake news.) (I had no contact t o an Altera/Intel FAE recently - not sure how they communicate this.)
However, especially Arria 10 GX for Cyclone pricing could be a real deal. ( Great deal. So wonderful.)
The main question (for many applications) is if Cyclone 10 GX has a lower p ower consumption than Arria 10 Gx - I doubt.
Regards
Thomas (sorry, couldn't resist...)
Reply to
thomas.entner99
As far as I can tell this is (very) advanced information. I have to wonder if the announcement was timed to take some wind out of the sails of the MicroSemi "PolarFire" announcement:
formatting link

At the moment, both the Altera and MicroSemi offerings seem to be unobtainium...
--
Gabor
Reply to
GaborSzakacs
On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 10:16:54 PM UTC+2, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com w rote:
us
prise, as there is already Max 10, Arria 10 and Stratix 10 - with similar j umps).
So, if 10LP is renamed IV E, which in turn is renamed III, does it follow t hat 10LP is manufactured on TSMC 60 nm processs ?
Including the two smallest ones? Hopefully, you are too pessimistic about it. If 10CX085 and 10CX105 are in reality just 10AX027 with majority of die fus ed off then its ratio of performance to static power consumption will be qu it bad. It happened to smaller members of Arria-II family and it was not nice.
yclone III/IV E, MAX II/V...)
s pricing benefit for the customer. But I always found the way it was commu nicated pretty misleading... (Very dishonest. Fake news.) (I had no contact to an Altera/Intel FAE recently - not sure how they communicate this.)
(Great deal. So wonderful.)
power consumption than Arria 10 Gx - I doubt.
Reply to
already5chosen
I wonder how long it will be before Altera transitions over to Intel fabs and/or if that will be an improvement or not.
It's interesting to me that the low end of the Cyclone 10 LP is just 6 kLUTs. That's my territory. No pricing yet and the packaging is still pretty bad for low end work. The choices are huge BGAs, a huge TQFP and smaller BGA that requires very fine artwork on the PCB which means no low cost PCB processes. I guess I could just use every other pin or something.
--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman
According to my understanding, official line is the same as before acquisition: only high end (Stratix 10) will be manufactured at Intel's fabs. The rest remains on TSMC. But I didn't follow the news too closely.
I can not judge for sure, but it seems to me that "your territory" is MAX-10.
Reply to
already5chosen
that 10LP is manufactured on TSMC 60 nm processs ?
This is indeed the case, it is even somewhere on their homepage, google for Cyclone 10 and 60nm... (Maybe they use a different flavour of 60nm process with better characteristics, but I do not really think so. Cyclone IV was at least the shrinked from 65nm to 60nm, but this was also done for Cyclone III). Interestingly, on the TSMC homepage, there is no 60nm process, only 65nm and 55nm..)
used off then its ratio of performance to static power consumption will be quit bad.
I fully agree on this. It they had a smaller die (with reduced power consum ption) and Cyclone pricing, this would be a real good product... But I doub t it. Another interesting questions is if there also comes a Cyclone 10 SX with SoC?
I think this is mainly a marketing thing to have something against Spartan 7, until the real new stuff is ready.
Regards,
Thomas
formatting link
- Home of EEBlaster and JPEG Codec
Reply to
thomas.entner99
I didn't realize MAX10 had ADC on chip as well as multipliers and memory. That's interesting. I can bring in lowish resolution signals and do signal processing on them. 16 bit ADC/DAC would be nicer. They still give me packaging heartburn. Even in these small parts they emphasize high I/O counts and fine pitch packages, *very* fine pitch.
--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman
Yes, it's here now.
formatting link

I don't think it was here 4-5 days ago, when I first heard about Cyclone-10. But may be I just didn't pay attention.
If it was really a shrink. 60nm can well be just a name for the variant of 65nm process that improved some characteristics, but not necessarily a density.
Reply to
already5chosen
Do you have any information that the Cyclone 10 GX will actually replace the Arria 10 GX?
I would expect the Cyclone 10 GX to replace the Cyclone V GX. The Cyclone 10 GX transceivers are slower than the current Arria 10 transceivers according to link posted earlier.
I think the 10 was introduced as this was the 10th generation FPGA from Altera. I can remember LSI Logic did a similar name change with their ASIC's when the G10 family was introduced.
//Petter
--
.sig removed by request.
Reply to
Petter Gustad
Please note that I do not "have information", I just look at the datasheet and outline the obvious...
I do not think that the new family will replace anything, all the families will coexist for quite some time. Of course new projects will mostly use ne wer families... (I think one of the reasons for the new family is to allow Altera to make more aggressive pricing for new projects and keep the pricin g high for the "old" families, esp. Arria 10, that are already used in prod ucts)
It would still be interesting to hear if there is maybe some subtle differe nce, e.g. in power consumption. Maybe someone has already access to an powe r estimator of Cyclone 10 GX to compare with Arria 10 (esp. the smallest pa rts of Cyclone 10 GX)?
Regards,
Thomas
Reply to
thomas.entner99

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.