TMS320F28334: Parallel computing

Hi Brian

What does your current product use? How many channels and what is the processing requirements?

Do you have a price target , peripheral integration and power requirements in mind? What is the interface preferred for your analog inputs?

Have you already evaluated the C2000 family ? I see the device tags selected as F28334?

Regards

Mukul 

hello,

if you are interested in C2000 real-time microcontrollers for this application I recommend looking at TMS320F28379D which has 4 cores (2 of C28x and 2 of CLA parallel control law accelerator).  TMS320F28388D then adds a 5th core (Arm M4) to off load communications.

C2000 is used for power electronics switching control so will have other peripherals like PWM outputs and system inputs (ADC, SDFM, comparators, etc.)

I am having nothing but trouble with your messaging system.  It lost my text twice now.  Trying one last time.

I will send the spreadsheet data separately.

Here is my present thinking from an email to other engineers that I wok with;

Frank,

Present thinking

Spreadsheet 1

It is more reliable and a cleaner design to have analog conversion (ADC) functions on the chip.  The first spreadsheet shows the most suitable DSP chips having onboard ADC capability.  The computational speeds of these DSP chips are relatively fast because the multicore chips can be exploited for the parallel computing due to their multiple cores.

Spreadsheet 2

Much more computational speed can be gained by using CPU chips that are not DSP chips but that are marketed for general computing in personal computers.  These are extremely fast compared to any DSP chips, in the range of 700 to 1000 faster in terms of gigaflops.  This implies that if the old baseline chips can handle the present computing load requirements, then the new selections will easily meet requirements for future controllers for quite some time into the future. 

ADC requirements could be handled via an external FPGA or an external ADC chip.  With this extreme computing performance, an FPGA would probably not be required.

I am leaning toward recommending the Intel i9 processor series.  It has the following considerations:

1. It is Intel's best processor and supported by Intel tools such as Visual Studio and Microsoft C.  Support and development tools are assured to be available, and single board computers for control with this chip are available for facilitating development.

2. Intel will continue to improve this line of single chip processors with increasing speed and capability and any software we develop will probably be portable to the new series of processors.

3. First cost is rather high and the high clock speeds require more expensive boards and peripherals, but this is a discounted factor at the Gardner Denver production volumes.

Please advise.

Here is one spreadsheet, a mix of with ADC and without ADC on bDSP ALL.xlsxard.

Here is one spreadsheet, a mix of with ADC and without ADC on b5224.DSP ALL.xlsxard.

Here is one spreadsheet, a mix of with ADC and without ADC on board.

1738.DSP ALL.xlsx

Mukul,

Here is another diagram that illustrates my thinking.  I think this one was about an NXP multi ARM chip.

Thanks Brian, i appreciate the additional information and background. 

We will be reviewing this a bit more, but based on the block diagram (and your spreadsheet which only shows c6713) - i recommend you to also look at 

K2H family 

AM6x family 

Hello Brian

I see that the TI sales team  is setting up some discussions with you and your team. So for now I am marking this "closed" .  We can re-open this discussion as needed. 

Regard

Mukul