What FPGAs Are Still Available?

[gnuarm]

With the global shortage, I'm wondering what parts to design in and what parts not to.  JLCPCB has a couple of Spartan 6 devices in 256 pin BGAs, but no inventory.  Digikey has none and a delivery date of Sept. 

My customer is making a "last time buy" of my present board.  I thought they were going to design me out with their respin of the product my board goes into.  Instead they are asking me for a price on respinning my board too. 

So I need to find an FPGA I can put on a 0.85 inch/21.6 mm wide board without going finer than 5/5 design rules... and actually buy!  I read something yesterday that Intel was saying this could last for a couple of years.  Wow!

[asmi]

How many IO pins and what kind of functionality/resources do you need in FPGA, and what is the quantity required? The question is quite vague.

[SiliconWizard]

I've been evaluating the Lattice ECP5 lately for a possible replacement for Xilinx in some future projects. And it's currently still available. For how long though, nobody knows. What's available today may become unavailable tomorrow.

[gnuarm]

Need ~60 I/Os, 4,000 LUTs with multipliers or 5,000 without.  Minimum speed grade, commercial temp. 

The quantity will depend on the orders.  They vary from 100 to 10,000.  Not sure how that matters when sources list a 6 month lead time. 

I want to find an FPGA that isn't presently on allocation.  I don't have a contract to design this board.  I'm just trying to figure out how limited my options are. 

I was hoping to use a Gowin part in the QFP100 package as the current part is.  But Gowin is on a US government sh*t list so it is not a good choice to put in products that are often sold to the US government.  We are using the GW1N-9 in an open source design.  It seems like a decent product.

[mikeselectricstuff]

Lattice XO2 - some 4000 and 7000's at Digikey

[asmi]

Talk to a Xilinx sales rep in your area and see what can they offer. Their offer will likely be significantly cheaper than DK prices, and their lead time might be better too. There is no downside for you to talk to them, you don't have to commit to anything.

As far as resources go, even the smallest XC7S6-1FTGB196C will be enough for you. It comes in 15x15 mm package, with 1 mm ball pitch, so no exotic PCB tech is required. This package has been specifically designed for 4 layer PCBs, so you won't need more than 4 layers as well (unless other stuff on your board commands more layers, that is).

[gnuarm]

I've been evaluating the Lattice ECP5 lately for a possible replacement for Xilinx in some future projects. And it's currently still available. For how long though, nobody knows. What's available today may become unavailable tomorrow.

Yeah, that's for sure, but better to start with a part that has a possibility. 

There are a number of Chinese FPGA startups and JLCPCB seems to be listing all of them as "discontinued".  Anlogic, AGM and they took Gowin off some time back.  I wonder what's up?

Anyone use yaqwsx.github.io/jlcparts to search the JLCPCB data base?  It almost makes it usable.  They split the FPGAs between Embedded Processors and Logic ICs.  What shows up under Embedded Processors is not just FPGAs with processors.  Odd.

[gnuarm]

Talk to a Xilinx sales rep in your area and see what can they offer. Their offer will likely be significantly cheaper than DK prices, and their lead time might be better too. There is no downside for you to talk to them, you don't have to commit to anything.

As far as resources go, even the smallest XC7S6-1FTGB196C will be enough for you. It comes in 15x15 mm package, with 1 mm ball pitch, so no exotic PCB tech is required. This package has been specifically designed for 4 layer PCBs, so you won't need more than 4 layers as well (unless other stuff on your board commands more layers, that is).

Yes, we've had this discussion before where you provided much useful info.  Thanks.

[SiliconWizard]

Lattice XO2 - some 4000 and 7000's at Digikey

Yep. And, if they are looking for cheaper, they could consider the iCE40 series.

[SuntUnMorcov]

Lattice XO2 - some 4000 and 7000's at Digikey

I've been wanting to have a play with this FPGA family, but found the installation and setup procedure for Lattice Diamond to be a pain in the a** (at least on GNU/Linux).  I am yet to attempt the install and setup on a Windows host, but suspect it will be a similar story there too.  I also found the documentation, at least for the software setup procedure, to be fairly shoddy.

[SiliconWizard]

Lattice XO2 - some 4000 and 7000's at Digikey

I've been wanting to have a play with this FPGA family, but found the installation and setup procedure for Lattice Diamond to be a pain in the a** (at least on GNU/Linux).  I am yet to attempt the install and setup on a Windows host, but suspect it will be a similar story there too.  I also found the documentation, at least for the software setup procedure, to be fairly shoddy.

Nah. Installation on Windows is a snap and the tools work fine. They are also very easy to use.


On Linux, your distribution may already have a package for Diamond, in which case I'd expect the maintainers to have done the dirty work for you.
Otherwise, have you read the following guide? https://www.latticesemi.com/view_document?document_id=53082
If anything, I'd suspect the problematic part may be with the license manager, as with most of those FPGA tools.

[Bassman59]

Lattice XO2 - some 4000 and 7000's at Digikey

I've been wanting to have a play with this FPGA family, but found the installation and setup procedure for Lattice Diamond to be a pain in the a** (at least on GNU/Linux).  I am yet to attempt the install and setup on a Windows host, but suspect it will be a similar story there too.  I also found the documentation, at least for the software setup procedure, to be fairly shoddy.

Installing Xilinx ISE on Linux is a disaster, of course.

I run Lattice Diamond in a Windows 7 VM. It installed with no issues and it works well enough.

[SilverSolder]

Lattice XO2 - some 4000 and 7000's at Digikey

I've been wanting to have a play with this FPGA family, but found the installation and setup procedure for Lattice Diamond to be a pain in the a** (at least on GNU/Linux).  I am yet to attempt the install and setup on a Windows host, but suspect it will be a similar story there too.  I also found the documentation, at least for the software setup procedure, to be fairly shoddy.

That's probably why they're still in stock (for now), LOL

[gnuarm]

Lattice XO2 - some 4000 and 7000's at Digikey

I've been wanting to have a play with this FPGA family, but found the installation and setup procedure for Lattice Diamond to be a pain in the a** (at least on GNU/Linux).  I am yet to attempt the install and setup on a Windows host, but suspect it will be a similar story there too.  I also found the documentation, at least for the software setup procedure, to be fairly shoddy.

Yeah, like most software things suck.  But what are you having trouble with?  I've used Diamond, and whatever the predecessor was called, for 15 years with no installation issues under three different versions of Windows including all the versions everyone hates, Vista, 8.0 and 10!  It does require a new license file every year.  The used to provide Active HDL for simulation and I'm used to that.  Now it is Modelsim which I understand is a bit more difficult to use.  In particular someone told me you can't add variables to the waveform display until you are in the module where the variables are declared.  Is that true?  In Active HDL you simply have to have run the simulation for any amount of time and the variables show up in a hierarchical view of the design.

[SuntUnMorcov]

Nah. Installation on Windows is a snap and the tools work fine. They are also very easy to use.

I run Lattice Diamond in a Windows 7 VM. It installed with no issues and it works well enough.

I've used Diamond, and whatever the predecessor was called, for 15 years with no installation issues under three different versions of Windows including all the versions everyone hates, Vista, 8.0 and 10!

In that case, I'll jump to giving the install on Windows a go.  The painful attempt to get it working on my GNU/Linux host, coupled with this work's low priority, led to me abandoning it for the now.  But with such a positive response from some experienced folk, I feel I might be pleasantly surprised.

On Linux, your distribution may already have a package for Diamond, in which case I'd expect the maintainers to have done the dirty work for you.
Otherwise, have you read the following guide? https://www.latticesemi.com/view_document?document_id=53082
If anything, I'd suspect the problematic part may be with the license manager, as with most of those FPGA tools.

I obtained the RPM package from Lattice directly and followed the documentation you referenced, but ran into some issues.  You are correct in your presumption that I had troubles with the license management daemon.

One of the first things I did was check to see if there was a package available for Lattice Diamond from the standard and extra package repositories for my distro (to no avail).

Anyhow, I'll give the Windows install a go.  With some luck, I'll be up and running soon enough and can evaluate this FPGA family (which would be great, because this family seems like a nice, cheap, and simple range of products, suitable for those with relatively limited needs).

Thanks for the feedback, all.

[SiliconWizard]

One common issue for the license managers of those FPGA tools (not specific to Lattice) is that they often still rely on ethernet interfaces being present (as the licenses are linked to the MAC address of the default ethernet interface), named as eth*, and sometimes, they will even only look at eth0. Thing is, with modern Linux systems, the network interface(s) often have a different name. In that case, there are various possible tricks. You can for instance read this: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/396382/how-can-i-show-the-old-eth0-names-and-also-rename-network-interfaces-in-debian-9

[SuntUnMorcov]

One common issue for the license managers of those FPGA tools (not specific to Lattice) is that they often still rely on ethernet interfaces being present (as the licenses are linked to the MAC address of the default ethernet interface), named as eth*, and sometimes, they will even only look at eth0. Thing is, with modern Linux systems, the network interface(s) often have a different name. In that case, there are various possible tricks. You can for instance read this: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/396382/how-can-i-show-the-old-eth0-names-and-also-rename-network-interfaces-in-debian-9

I am familiar with such methods of tying a software license to a host and its pitfalls (which is why my team developed a licensing framework that used other methods to achieve this for our products).  This was not the issue and I am aware of it, but thanks for the pointer anyway.

I am also no stranger to GNU/Linux.  I primarily develop real-time software for GNU/Linux systems (data acquisition and control systems, with an emphasis on communication).  But like everyone, I can sometimes have my moments of absolute stupidity and absent mindedness, so all pointers are really appreciated.

But I believe the issue was fairly Lattice Diamond specific.  I'm going to put getting it up and running on GNU/Linux on the back burner for now, but if I try it again and run into issues, I'll likely give you a shout.

[Bassman59]

Lattice XO2 - some 4000 and 7000's at Digikey

I've been wanting to have a play with this FPGA family, but found the installation and setup procedure for Lattice Diamond to be a pain in the a** (at least on GNU/Linux).  I am yet to attempt the install and setup on a Windows host, but suspect it will be a similar story there too.  I also found the documentation, at least for the software setup procedure, to be fairly shoddy.

Yeah, like most software things suck.  But what are you having trouble with?  I've used Diamond, and whatever the predecessor was called, for 15 years with no installation issues under three different versions of Windows including all the versions everyone hates, Vista, 8.0 and 10!  It does require a new license file every year.  The used to provide Active HDL for simulation and I'm used to that.  Now it is Modelsim which I understand is a bit more difficult to use.  In particular someone told me you can't add variables to the waveform display until you are in the module where the variables are declared.  Is that true?  In Active HDL you simply have to have run the simulation for any amount of time and the variables show up in a hierarchical view of the design.

I've been using ModelSim for, oh, I don't know, nearly 30 years, back when it was published by a company called Model Technology. (Then it was bought by Mentor Graphics many years ago and now Mentor was bought by someone.)

The ModelSim user interface has barely changed in all of that time, and it shows its age. But ... I find it easier to use than Active-HDL. Simply create a Simulation Configuration which points to the top level entity, set generics as you require, and go. From the command line you just type "run 100 ms" or whatever. Drag signals from the list out to the waveform display. In other words, I find it easier to use than Active-HDL.

[gnuarm]

I've been using ModelSim for, oh, I don't know, nearly 30 years, back when it was published by a company called Model Technology. (Then it was bought by Mentor Graphics many years ago and now Mentor was bought by someone.)

The ModelSim user interface has barely changed in all of that time, and it shows its age. But ... I find it easier to use than Active-HDL. Simply create a Simulation Configuration which points to the top level entity, set generics as you require, and go. From the command line you just type "run 100 ms" or whatever. Drag signals from the list out to the waveform display. In other words, I find it easier to use than Active-HDL.

I'm not sure how this is any better than Active HDL.  It sounds pretty much identical other than that the "list" you mention does not include variables to the best of my knowledge.  I haven't used Modelsim in some time, but I was helping a newbie remotely, myself working with A-HDL and the other guy working with ModelSim.  He indicated he could not find the variables to add to the waveform display. 

In A-HDL the simulation has to be started, which populates a window with all signals and variables in a hierarchical list like file explorer.  I typically drag all signal and variables to the display window and delete anything I know I won't need.  Can't get much more simple. 

I also save this display list and recall it if I am going to be returning to this simulation, again, rather easy.  I'm sure Modelsim does the same thing. 

So was the newbie just not familiar enough with the tool?  Is it easy to select variables for the waveform display when the point of execution is not in the appropriate code block (which is what I remember from 13 years ago)?

[NiHaoMike]

Installing Xilinx ISE on Linux is a disaster, of course.

I have had little difficulty installing Xilinx software (ISE, Vivado, Vitis) on Gentoo.

[gnuarm]

Installing Xilinx ISE on Linux is a disaster, of course.

I have had little difficulty installing Xilinx software (ISE, Vivado, Vitis) on Gentoo.

Don't they provide a Linux install that is tested and supported under some rendition of Linux?  Red Hat is what sticks in my mind. 

You guys are scaring me about trying to use the Xilinx tools.   

[Bassman59]

Installing Xilinx ISE on Linux is a disaster, of course.

I have had little difficulty installing Xilinx software (ISE, Vivado, Vitis) on Gentoo.

Don't they provide a Linux install that is tested and supported under some rendition of Linux?  Red Hat is what sticks in my mind. 

You guys are scaring me about trying to use the Xilinx tools.   

Xilinx only officially supported Red Hat Enterprise, which is also available as CentOS.

[Bassman59]

Installing Xilinx ISE on Linux is a disaster, of course.

I have had little difficulty installing Xilinx software (ISE, Vivado, Vitis) on Gentoo.

Getting the fucking JTAG dongle to work with the programming software and with ChipScope requires a stupid command-line library-load dance every time. It's bad and Xilinx should feel bad.

[asmi]

I had zero issues installing and using Vivado 2020.1 and 2020.2 (including JTAG programming) in Ubuntu 20. Works like a charm right after installation. And I would argue that Vivado works faster in Linux than in Win10 Pro, though I didn't do exact apples-to-applies comparison, so take it with a grain of salt.

[SiliconWizard]

I had zero issues installing and using Vivado 2020.1 and 2020.2 (including JTAG programming) in Ubuntu 20. Works like a charm right after installation. And I would argue that Vivado works faster in Linux than in Win10 Pro, though I didn't do exact apples-to-applies comparison, so take it with a grain of salt.

I plan on running Vivado on Linux. I use Arch Linux myself, but there's a user package for it, so it should work.

The one thing that's annoying is that it relies on the full installer (in tar.gz format), and there seems to be only ONE download for it from Xilinx supporting all OSs, which means you have to download a ~43GB archive.

The Linux web installer is not supported on Arch Linux, although it *may* work. Dunno.