Hello, I have some question to compare FPGA vs CPU: 1- FPGA consume power more than CPU ? 2- FPGA is always more faster than CPU what ever the fuctions to execute? 3- developpement with FPGA is more expensive than developpement CPU ? 4- developpement with FPGA is hard to maintain than developpement CPU ? 5- developpement with FPGA is hard to produce than developpement CPU ? Thanks a lot :)
Abdeljalil wrote: > Hello, > > I have some question to compare FPGA vs CPU: > > 1- FPGA consume power more than CPU ? > > 2- FPGA is always more faster than CPU what ever the fuctions to > execute? > > 3- developpement with FPGA is more expensive than developpement CPU ? > > 4- developpement with FPGA is hard to maintain than developpement CPU ? > > 5- developpement with FPGA is hard to produce than developpement CPU ? > > Thanks a lot :) 1 - No or yes 2 - No or yes 3 - No or yes 4 - No or yes 5 - No or yes Your question(s) is as specific as when I write: C is better than VHDL. Nobody can answer this question. So 42
Abdeljalil wrote: > I have some question to compare FPGA vs CPU Whats the background to this questions? What FPGA do you have in focus? What CPU? What job has to be solved? Until at least those parameter are not clearly specified ui is completely right.
I m a student ... i prepare an exam and i have this question we have a CPU RISC and a FPGA .. the both execute the same function Thanks
I cannot see any question there... Abdeljalil wrote: > we have a CPU RISC and a FPGA .. the both execute the same function What function? > I m a student ... i prepare an exam and i have this question So, let's try it that way: you guess an answer and we discuss it.
:
Edited by Moderator
Abdeljalil wrote: > I have some question to compare FPGA vs CPU: As the previous authors already said, there's no direct 1:1 comparison possible (and for sure not in the generality as asked by you), because it's two completely different pieces of hardware, or should I rather say two completely different approaches. Whilst an FPGA is basically only a huge field of transistors which can be connected programmatically such that they comprise almost all logical functions conceivable (I. e. those functions can - and mostly do - run in parallel), a CPU is a processor which executes algorithmic commands instruction per instruction (I. e. fully successive operation (at least in the classic, coursebook sense - of course nowadays there's much more sophisticated mechanisms included at least in all PC CPUs). Would propose for you to refer to Wikipedia in order to gain a basic understanding of the working principles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FPGA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU
https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/101472/how-can-an-fpga-outperform-a-cpu in this article we say that FPGA Consume more than CPU !
This FPGA promotion "inadvertently" gives the explanation: FPGA can implement parallel structures and be faster, but at the price of more gates and more power consumption. CPU can implement same calculation in a short program in tiny memory, and use much less power, but slower. However if CPU has multiple cores with SIMD then it can be as fast as FPGA and still low power. https://www.xilinx.com/products/technology/dsp.html Worst example we had: Some fuzzy control algorithm fitting nicely into tiny 8051 exceeded huge FPGA with 100k gates.
Watch this topic
Disable multi-page viewPlease log in before posting. Registration is free and takes only a minute.
Existing account
Do you have a Google/GoogleMail account? No registration required!
Log in with Google account
Log in with Google account
No account? Register here.