Newsgroups: comp.sys.transputer
From: nmacmull@istar.ca (Neil MacMullen)
Subject: Re: Short memories
Organization: Powerstor Systems Inc
Date: 26 Nov 1997 12:16:22 EST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <65hlh6$loo$1@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>

In article <Gc2o8KAud$e0EwIn@nice-eur.demon.co.uk>, graham@nice-eur.demon.co.uk 
says...
>
>There is a processor available today (and has been for a number of
>years, from a mainstream supplier with state of the art processing
>performance, significant on-chip memory, and the world's fastest, fully
>integrated, inter-processor communications.
>
>The device in question is the ADSP21060 (SHARC) from Analog Devices.
>(www.analog.com - check it out)
>
>The 21060 (SHARC):
>- is 40 MIPS / 120 MFLOPS (about 15 times faster than the T9000 
>  eventually achieved)
>- has 4Mb (0.5 MBytes) on-chip zero wait state memory ( 32 times more 
>  than the T9000 )
>- has 6 communication links (2 more than the T9) with DMA engines which 
>  can run at up to 40MBytes/sec each ( over 3 times faster than an 
>  individual DS-Link on the T9000 )
>

With all due respect to Graham - 

We are using SHARCS as communications processors for our current project
(prototyped with Alex boards funnily enough).  Yes, the link technology is
great, but the chip is horrible to program for anyone used to (spoilt by) 
transputers.  I mean, sizeof(char) == sizeof(int32) ?  Keeping track
of whether your pointers are PM or DM (program or data memory) ?
You have to be kidding!  The SHARC is undoubtedly brilliant for what 
it purports to be - a DSP chip - but I really wouldn't want to have to 
write a high-level  application for it.  I once talked to a man who had 
to do just that (a  distributed renderer) using SHARCS and swore he 
would never go near them again.

Of course the usual disclaimers apply - in a couple of years you may
find me on comp.dsp raving about what a great architecture the sharc 
was :-)

			Neil