Subject: RE: I DO want to continue |
Author: Johan Klockars (as28-3-8.va.g.bonet.se)
Date: 06-14-2003 00:37
> I agree with you on most points.
I, on the other hand, probably disagree with him (and you) on every one of them. ;-)
> I don't want those intel standards either (PCI, USB).
They may be designed by Intel, but everyone and his grandmother (just about) uses them. For good reason.
While PCI certainly is not perfect for everything (it's terribly slow unless you can make use of burst accesses, for example), it's rather good at what it's designed for.
> Still, we need USB to connect modern pronters
Done, as soon as you put a PCI bus on there.
And as you mention elsewere, you probably need that for your IDE controller, GB ethernet, etc, anyway.
> Can't we integrate a dsp even more powerfull than the deese one?
For there to be a much point in it at all, you'd certainly have to. Compared to any modern CPU, that DSP is dead slow.
> Maybe we we can put in a very fast, state of the art TI dsp and emulate the 56000 just for compatibility issues.
You don't want to try to emulate one DSP using another.
> I think the way to go is to design a mainboard without PCI but with some propriety extension connector/bus
I _really_ don't understand how anyone can suggest designing something like this with a proprietary bus.
> This way we can add PCIX later if it turns out to be needed in the future.
Perhaps you mean PCI Express, which is the future variant of PCI (serial rather than parallel communication, but software compatible with normal PCI). PCI X is only a higher speed (up to 100 MHz, IIRC) variant of normal PCI, with a very limited number of connectors (a single one at 100 MHz, IIRC) per bus.
|