| ??? 04/18/05 14:23 Read: times |
#91828 - Prahlad, waithing for a conclusion Responding to: ???'s previous message |
A relatively fast 16*16 can be achieved by what has been discussed here. That may and may not be good enough. I see no means of finding anything (on a regular '51) that will be faster.
Why fight a windmill - because a windmill is there? If the above is not good enough, then very fast 16*16 multiply can be achieved by 1) Using a 16 bgit processor (ARM, XA et al price ~ '51) 2) Using a <12 clock derivative (Up to 12 * '51 equivalent speed) 3) Using a derivative (I know of SILabs) with a MAC 4) Using an external multiplier (fpga etc) We are waiting for Prahlad to sign off on a solution. Erik |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Fast Square. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Square dancing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| table lookup??? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| code & algorithm | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 16*16 bit is slower than what I want. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| How fast? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: How Fast | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ... probably impossible in 15 cycles | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| why cycles ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: Microseconds | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| table lookup | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Natsemi appnote or CORDIC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Natsemi link to appnote | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| (a+b)^2=a^2+2*a*b+b^2 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Thats Slow. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| faster need hardware | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| How fast do you need? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: How Fast. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Just? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Incorrect | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Correct? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Whooooopa... Sorry. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Thanks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I tried... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| optimum? table driven | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Jan metod | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Hardware? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| CPLD? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| SILabs f12x does it in hardware | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: SiLabs F12x | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Price | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| F12x price | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| F12x MAC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| provided in the datasheet | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Just out of interest | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| clarification | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| CPLD? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| too expensive | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Absolute rubbish Oleg | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| explain | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| your right | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| especially for those... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I need to say this.... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| By the way..... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| just a demo | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Hang on. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Oh bollocks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Well oleg | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Please check my answer. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Here you go | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You're having me on. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Pascal? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Pascal? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| It was changed because,,, | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Its because | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| For Jez | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| For Michael | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| simulation | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: Fast Square | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Prahlad, waithing for a conclusion | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| just an exercise... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Tricky | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Jez asked his cat, I asked my sheep | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Conclusion. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
SPI EEPROM | 01/01/70 00:00 |