News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:To reinvent the processor by jcranmer on Saturday May 11, 2019 @12:20PM (#19886889)
The problem is that FPGAs just can't drive memory bandwidth. (And FPGA configuration times are obnoxiously long).
Re:To reinvent the processor by analognoise on Saturday May 11, 2019 @04:46PM (#19888306)
Can't drive memory bandwidth? I can saturate any memory interface with ease. All line rate Ethernet systems (pushing 100+ Gb/s now) are done with FPGAS. What are you talking about??

I can program a kintex ultrascale @ 16 bits transmitted at something like 100Mhz. The system is up fully in less than 5msec from power good. This feature is used in every system where milliseconds count - including military systems. Are you confusing JTAG reconfiguration speeds with production configuration speeds?

I'm very confused by what you said, can you elaborate?

Re:To reinvent the processor by alain94040 on Saturday May 11, 2019 @07:42PM (#19889096)
16 bits transmitted at something like 100Mhz

That's 1.6 Gbit/s. Looking up random Intel Xeon, specs, the memory bandwidth from the CPU to memory is 100 Gbytes/s. That's 1000X more than what you are describing.

Re:To reinvent the processor by analognoise on Saturday May 11, 2019 @08:13PM (#19889242)
You only need to pass a bin file to program an FPGA - it's like 20Mbits (hence a few msec).

Memory interfaces are not the same as the reconfiguration programming interface.

The memory interfaces (to external memory) are standardized - DDR3/4. Are you talking about to a L1 cache? Because all of the equivalent in an FPGA (BRAM, in Xilinx terminology) is accessible within a single clock cycle on an FPGA (assuming you can meet P&R/timing). Each DDR4 chip can do something like 20Gbit/sec, I can fit 5 of them on a KCU115 1924...

And that's external memory. Internally there is BRAM (and it's newer variants, which means you don't even have to go off chip).

Re:To reinvent the processor by foobiekr on Saturday May 11, 2019 @07:01PM (#19888913)
NPUs like Tomahawk, etc are not FPGAs.
Re:To reinvent the processor by analognoise on Saturday May 11, 2019 @08:28PM (#19889314)
Not in their final version, no. I see what you meant - I should have said "are developed with". Lemme edit that.

https://store.digilentinc.com/netfpga-sume-virtex-7-fpga-dev...

But for 7k you can get an older design with 4x 10Gbps Ethernet. It's used at Stanford and Cambridge for... High speed network processing research.

High speed trading firms almost universally use FPGAs. You can't go faster without custom silicon. But you can sure as shit max out as many DDR and network interfaces as you can physically attach.

Re:To reinvent the processor by foobiekr on Monday May 13, 2019 @03:06PM (#19902741)
10G is a very slow speed at this point. But yes, there are very good use cases for FPGAs.
Re:To reinvent the processor by ezconnect on Saturday May 11, 2019 @12:48PM (#19887078)
You only configure it once when you buy the software, installing software takes time too right now. FPGAs do come with embedded memory with very low latency. Someone will figure it out how to make it faster if things get implemented that way.