Wanted - PC borad or example schematics

Would this do what you want?

http://www.gocct.com/sheets/TP/tpb1x3sd.htm

In article

<1685845295.241488201215693.JavaMail.jive@e14-cr-vp-appj8-04.premierfarnel

l.net>, noreply-379382@element14.com says...

 

Would this do what you want?

 

http://www.gocct.com/sheets/TP/tpb1x3sd.htm

thanks but no.

(It has graphics, ethernet, sata etc ...)

I'm looking for a processor only board with just processor support on board..

It seems no one makes anything close but thanks to everyone for trying.

I guess I'll have to do my own painful as that is.

Everybody please - thank you - I'm done. What I want isn't available

or cannot be identified by the people here. A production project has been started

to identify products and companies  to produce it while we search elsewhere.

Repeatedly telling me that ARM's are good just ignores the fact I've said

they are no good to me. They don't have the power, the architecture is

overcomplex by trying to hit too many buttons amongst other issues

and the licensing is absurd or at the very least unaceptable.

I'm not happy about using X86 either - it's a botched product because

of it's history and is difficult to use for similar reasons to the ARM

processors - it does however have more power and a very wide freely

available toolbase meaning employee skills are easy enough to find.

Just to be clear - intel did a great job of backward protection but that

means an ineficient difficult to use badly designed CPU for new

products. In short - for anything new it's a dog. But there's nothing

comparable so I'm stuck with it for now.

Hopefully that answers the daft comment about "prejudice" earlier. also.

Repeatedly demanding more information "so you can provide an answer"

just tells me you either havn't read what i asked for or don't know enough

to answer in the first place.

So - no need to continue wasting your time.

once again - thank you all for the suggestions but you can stop now.

colin

colin[2] wrote:

 

Everybody please - thank you - I'm done.

Good for you!

colin[2] wrote:

 

Hopefully that answers the daft comment about "prejudice" earlier. also.

 

Repeatedly demanding more information "so you can provide an answer"

just tells me you either havn't read what i asked for or don't know enough

to answer in the first place.

 

So - no need to continue wasting your time.

once again - thank you all for the suggestions but you can stop now.

 

colin

This is just rude, and saying thank you in your last sentence doesn't make it any less so.

Lots of people on here are very capable engineering professionals who share their experience here for free. If we were paid to do consultancy for a project a more thorough response might be more forthcoming but you can't expect people to spend lots of effort trying to help you find your answers for free, especially when you are dismissive and rude.

I wish you the best of luck with your project but I wont partake in your discussions any further.

Regards,

Rachael

Ah,

what I'm remember about it.

There was at that time a processor called "Transputer", - e.g. T400, T800, from INMOS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transputer

That was an open system fine and easy to use for parallel processing.

I don't know where you can actually get this thing, please look for.

I was also interested about it, that was so in the 80's.

Gerald

----

Hi,

You never told us about your projects.
We can not read into your brain what you think.

AND!!! Many projects are under security and we can not divulging our secrets.
But, I think you have a secret project ... from the "COMPANY"?

Have a nice day.

Gerald

---

In article

<874879143.151488369719990.JavaMail.jive@e14-cr-vp-appj8-02.premierfarnell.

net>, noreply-391202@element14.com says...

This is just rude, and saying thank you in your last sentence doesn't make it any less so

 

As a matter of fact I've been very polite.

This newsgroup I believe has not in the least judging by the last few posts.

Clearly not a group of professionals.

Element 14 was a last ditch effort to source what we need - I won't waste my

time in future if this is how people behave here.

.colin

Hi Colin,

Everyone here has been trying to read sufficient engineering requirements from you, but the information is too vague to help in any meaningful way.

In fact, your first post didn't quantify a single requirement, it was all subjective (e.g. "some rom or flash or whatever").

As another example, you suggest that 'maybe' memory management is ok. Well, that makes a massive difference not only to the possible products that can be suggested, but will make a massive difference to whichever person may have to code up the driver for the USB 3.1 that you mention if the part you choose does not have memory management, unless some OS is suggested too.

Whichever forum you choose to seek your information from, it is strongly suggested that you get the requirements in detail from your engineers before trying to find a suitable device.

Here is a web link that may help in framing questions:

How to Ask Questions using the Create Discussion tool

Not everything there will apply for all questions, but even the first three points can often help. It might not immediately help you, but it helps engineers to understand the context of your needs and ultimately get you a better answer.

1. My Goal in detail

        (e.g. climb a mountain next year)

2. What things I'm trying to solve

         (e.g. establish how high I am)

3. What constraints I have

         (e.g. cost, software experience, hardware experience)

Gerald Schwarz wrote:

 

There was at that time a processor called "Transputer", - e.g. T400, T800, from INMOS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transputer

 

That was an open system fine and easy to use for parallel processing.

I don't know where you can actually get this thing, please look for.

I was also interested about it, that was so in the 80's.

Gerald, what was the original concept for the transputer eventually morphed into XMOS xCORE: http://www.xmos.com/products/silicon

Best Regards,

Rachael

They've had some investment in recent times and have also spun off another company developing a new range called IPU (Intelligent Processing Unit). It sounds super interesting, and will be available this year as I understand. The original xCORE range has evolved over the past few years too, they increased the pipeline and doubled up on some parts of the processor, to allow dual execution, to the point that even GigEth is possible with it : ) It has been on my list for ages to build up a small board with the recent xCORE (called xCORE-200) but lack of time hasn't helped : ( This summer hopefully.

shabaz wrote:

 

They've had some investment in recent times and have also spun off another company developing a new range called IPU (Intelligent Processing Unit). It sounds super interesting, and will be available this year as I understand. The original xCORE range has evolved over the past few years too, they increased the pipeline and doubled up on some parts of the processor, to allow dual execution, to the point that even GigEth is possible with it : ) It has been on my list for ages to build up a small board with the recent xCORE (called xCORE-200) but lack of time hasn't helped : ( This summer hopefully.

There's never enough time, but this sounds fun, any thoughts on uses or is it just for educational purposes 

Gerald Schwarz wrote:

 

Ah,

what I'm remember about it.

There was at that time a processor called "Transputer", - e.g. T400, T800, from INMOS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transputer

 

That was an open system fine and easy to use for parallel processing.

I don't know where you can actually get this thing, please look for.

I was also interested about it, that was so in the 80's.

 

Gerald

----

Happy memories    back in the "Transputer" days I put together a design proposal using an array of T800 devices to perform matrix transformations I even went on an Occam  training course at Inmos.

Happy times

Gerald Schwarz wrote:

 

Ah,

what I'm remember about it.

There was at that time a processor called "Transputer", - e.g. T400, T800, from INMOS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transputer

 

That was an open system fine and easy to use for parallel processing.

I don't know where you can actually get this thing, please look for.

I was also interested about it, that was so in the 80's.

 

Gerald

----

Happy memories    back in the "Transputer" days I put together a design proposal using an array of T800 devices to perform matrix transformations I even went on an Occam  training course at Inmos.

Happy times