General Technical Discussion

[eugeny_brychkov]

Hello guys, I am new here, and need some information. Please advise.

1. if I do not have "corporate" email address (my mailbox is located on the "public domain" server), will I be able to receive support from Xilinx if needed?

2. I need fpga device, with 25K cells, approx 200 io pins (more is better) which I can solder myself (clearly BGA will not work, maybe QFP?). Which device would you propose to consider? Are there such ones in the Xilinx portfolio? To be precise I am looking for replacement for Altera EP3C25Q240.

Thank you.

[eteam00]

1. if I do not have "corporate" email address (my mailbox is located on the "public domain" server), will I be able to receive support from Xilinx if needed?

A few interesting threads on this topic....

http://forums.xilinx.com/t5/Spartan-Family-FPGAs/V-between-MGTAVCC-and-MGTAVCCPLL/m-p/207459

http://forums.xilinx.com/t5/Hierarchical-Design/PR-evaluation-license-partial-bit-file-to-xsvf/m-p/7...

2. I need fpga device, with 25K cells, approx 200 io pins (more is better) which I can solder myself (clearly BGA will not work, maybe QFP?). Which device would you propose to consider? Are there such ones in the Xilinx portfolio?

The requirement for 200 user IOs rules out the TQ144 and PQ208 packages.  That pretty much leaves the PQ240 package as the only option.  (A 200+ pin PLCC would be ridiculous!) There are some good reasons the PQ240 package is not very popular, not the least of which is its huge size relative to its modest pincount.

Well, I could spend 15 minutes or so checking each of the Family Overview documents for the various FPGA product families for you...  but that is something you could easily do for yourself.  Cruise on over to the Xilinx website home page, click on the Products tab, and navigate to each of the current production FPGA families.

For each of the FPGA product families there should be a "Family Overview" document which clearly and quickly provides the answer to your question.

I do not know if there is (or is not) a current production (Spartan-3A and later) FPGA device which (still) offers the PQ240 package, because I have not looked for one.

Is there a compelling reason you require the ability to solder this part yourself?  Are off-the-shelf FPGA development boards unusable for your purposes?

-- Bob Elkind

[eugeny_brychkov]

---

eteam00 wrote:

1. if I do not have "corporate" email address (my mailbox is located on the "public domain" server), will I be able to receive support from Xilinx if needed?

A few interesting threads on this topic....

http://forums.xilinx.com/t5/Spartan-Family-FPGAs/V-between-MGTAVCC-and-MGTAVCCPLL/m-p/207459

http://forums.xilinx.com/t5/Hierarchical-Design/PR-evaluation-license-partial-bit-file-to-xsvf/m-p/7...

---

If I would buy Xilinx products I became its customer and should by default be eligible for the company support. Forums is a vehicle without any SLA and questionable reliability of the information. I am here not to play and have a fun - but to make business, and most of the times forum member support is not acceptable (nothing personal :)

---

eteam00 wrote:

2. I need fpga device, with 25K cells, approx 200 io pins (more is better) which I can solder myself (clearly BGA will not work, maybe QFP?). Which device would you propose to consider? Are there such ones in the Xilinx portfolio?

The requirement for 200 user IOs rules out the TQ144 and PQ208 packages.  That pretty much leaves the PQ240 package as the only option.  (A 200+ pin PLCC would be ridiculous!) There are some good reasons the PQ240 package is not very popular, not the least of which is its huge size relative to its modest pincount.

Well, I could spend 15 minutes or so checking each of the Family Overview documents for the various FPGA product families for you...  but that is something you could easily do for yourself.  Cruise on over to the Xilinx website home page, clock on the Products tab, and keep navigating to each of the current production FPGA families.

For each of the FPGA product families there should be a "Family Overview" document which clearly and quickly provides the answer to your question.

I do not know if there is (or is not) a current production (Spartan-3A and later) FPGA device which (still) offers the PQ240 package, because I have not looked for one.

---

I specified very precise requirements: Xilinx ??? >= EP3C25Q240. Please give me a solution (or soloutions) to the inequality. I am starting with FPGAs, and do not have much IP "baggage".

---

eteam00 wrote:

Is there a compelling reason you require the ability to solder this part yourself?  Are off-the-shelf FPGA development boards unusable for your purposes? 

---

Yes, I develop my own board. It is complete product, and not development board as it is thought in the "programmers" community.

Anyway thank you so muich for providing useful information.

[eteam00]

If I would buy Xilinx products I became its customer and should by default be eligible for the company support.

But you haven't bought Xilinx products and you aren't a Xilinx customer and all the support you need is readily available to you on the Xilinx website.  Do you agree?

Forums is a vehicle without any SLA and questionable reliability of the information.

I cannot recall any support service in which I have had 100% confidence that every information detail provided to me was correct.  Having said that, you make a valid point:  the information and opinions provided in these forum are no better (or reliable) than the person who provides them, and there is no competency test required for posting opinions and information in these forums.

On the other hand, when you receive advice on the forum to read the Xilinx documents for yourself, what might possibly be wrong with this advice?  Perhaps the Xilinx docs do not include package information?  This would be quick and easy to verify...

I am here not to play and have a fun - but to make business, and most of the times forum member support is not acceptable (nothing personal :)

So get down to business.  If having a non-gmail, non-yahoo email address stands in your path as an obstacle, then spend 15 minutes to remove the obstacle.  Set up a business email address.  If you let this stand in your way, your business prospects are not good.  Don't get hung up on little things, and do not make big principled issues from small unimportant details.

I specified very precise requirements: Xilinx ??? >= EP3C25Q240. Please give me a solution (or solutions) to the inequality.

I gave you the information you need to answer your own question.  You could easily have answered your precise question, already.  I am trying to help you, this does not mean that I agree to be your servant.

I am starting with FPGAs, and do not have much IP "baggage".

What is the meaning of this which you are trying to convey?  Are you trying to say that you are not tied to a specific FPGA vendor or device family?

Yes, I develop my own board. It is complete product, and not development board as it is thought in the "programmers" community.

I am a product developer.  I strongly recommend that you discard the requirement for home soldering.  If the cost of professional surface mount assembly services is too high, then suggest you develop your application with a low-cost off-the-shelf development board.  Then raise funds based on your 'proof-of-concept' implementation, enough to afford a proper board design and proper assembly service.  This presumes that your product value is mostly in FPGA IP, rather than sophisticated hardware surrounding the FPGA.

If your product value is mostly in sophisticated hardware surrounding the FPGA, then you must develop your product with a custom board design.  Check business contacts in your local area for the surface mount board assembly house in your area with the best reputation.  Ask the assembly house for the cost of mounting a (example) BGA324 package, using their rework station.  This will be much lower cost than full board assembly services, and will help you to overcome the package compromise which is standing in your way.

A 240-pin flatpack is deeply compromised, both electrically and mechanically.  I hope your entire product and business plan does not depend on the availability of a 240-pin flatpack FPGA package.

I hope this helps you.

-- Bob Elkind

[mcgett]

> To be precise I am looking for replacement for Altera EP3C25Q240.

While QFP type packages may be easier to assemble at home they have significant performance problems that are putting them in the "dinosaur" category for FPGAs.   If a QFP package with 200 I/O is a must have than you should stick with the EP3C25Q240 device as there is no similiar (25K LUTs, 200 I/Os, QFP) modern FPGA family from Xilinx that is a match.

If a QFP is not a must have then the Spartan-6 6SLX25-CSG324 is a rough equivalent.

[eugeny_brychkov]

Guys, thank you very much for your contributions... I am sad to hear that FPGA market is taking this direction of being software oriented (with specific barriers to the hardware development).

I still have one question, can you answer in short if you have it.

Ireviewed threads pointed by eteam00, they speak about requirement of corporate e-mail address.

Do you know WHY - the root cause - Xilinx needs corporate address? Which risks or opportunities are addressed by excluding general public from eligibility for support?

[bassman59]

---

eugeny_brychkov wrote:

Guys, thank you very much for your contributions... I am sad to hear that FPGA market is taking this direction of being software oriented (with specific barriers to the hardware development).

---

"Software oriented?" Nobody said that.

And there are no "specific barriers to hardware development," unless you mean "no QFP devices," in which case, welcome to the real world, where the BGA has won because it's the best package for high-speed (and high density) designs.

And ya know what? You can hand-attach a BGA device to a PCB. I see it done here every day.