http://shop.ztex.de/product_info.php?cPath=21&products_id=28
dear gnuradio developers,
i was searching on opencores.org to see if there was a SoC that
incorporates an FPGA(-like) device with an open core, and i
accidentally encountered the above USB-FPGA board. it has a Cypress
CY7C68013A/14A 480mb/s USB-2 Microcontroller and a Xilinx Spartan-3
XC3S400 FPGA. it is also accompanied by a developer board:
Development Board / Experimental Board 1.1 for Series 1 FPGA Boards
the price for the USB-FPGA is an incredibly-low $EUR 70, and the
developer board is only $20.
so my primary question is: is this USB-FPGA board (apart from the
issue of connecting to A-D / D-A boards) suitable for use to do an
802.11b transceiver? is it fast enough?
many thanks,
l.
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
Development Board / Experimental Board 1.1 for Series 1 FPGA Boards
l.
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
[email protected]
Discuss-gnuradio Info Page
This is a fairly loaded question, as it completely depends on WHERE you
implement certain portions of the 802.11b waveform. The primary
bottleneck is the USB bus, and you can’t get 20 MHz of bandwidth over
that bus. BBN and whoever else worked on the current GNU radio 802.11b
waveform solved this by moving the despreading to the FPGA. This is
just one example. In the end, it completely depends on where you
implement the latency and bandwidth sensitive components of the
waveform.
Tim
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Tim N. [email protected] wrote:
XC3S400 FPGA. it is also accompanied by a developer board:
many thanks,
This is a fairly loaded question, as it completely depends on WHERE you
implement certain portions of the 802.11b waveform. The primary bottleneck
is the USB bus, and you can’t get 20 MHz of bandwidth over that bus.
ah - eek! i wasn’t anticipating it to be that much. i was expecting
a much-reduced amount of data.
BBN
and whoever else worked on the current GNU radio 802.11b waveform solved
this by moving the despreading to the FPGA. This is just one example.
ohh, ok - so it’s doable - just… rather technical 
thanks for responding, tim.
l.