In Preparation for the AVNET MiniZed (Xilinx Zynq XC7Z007S SoC) RoadTest. What Do You Need?

I wonder how hot that Zynq gets, particularly if it's under an Arduino shield.  I remember that Parallella, which has a Zynq as well as its Epiphany parallel processing chip, had a lot of heat problems early on.

I'd like to echo John's comment that this board is not really suitable for initial learning about FPGAs - the Zynq chips are very, very difficult to get to grips with. There is all the difficulty of the series 7 FPGA and an ARM applications processor with a sophisticated interface to the FPGA as well.

Don't misunderstand - the Zynq is a great chip - but it is complicated. The basic documentation for the memory interface on the series 7 FPGA (that's the little tiny bit in the corner of the chip that talks to DDR3 RAM) runs to 678 pages.

The Zedboard doesn't, in my opinion, have a useful IO configuration  - it doesn't have Ethernet so the ARM, which typically runs Linux, has no useful IO port. The Arduino interface and 2 PMODs is about enough to connect a serious ADC and some debugging pins (I know this because I've used a similar boards (Arty and Nexys Video)).

So it's a bit of tiger in a very small box.

If you want to do more than just run some demo stuff where you point and click though many pages of detailed instructions then you will need to to do some serious work and it will take a long time.

If you have decided to use this chip for a project and need to get the hang of it and the tools, the board is a cheap way to get started - otherwise I can't see much point in it. If you want to learn about the Xilinx 7 series FPGA then an ARTY is a better route (Artix FPGA rather than Zynq so no ARM on board).

MK

Michael,

considering your opinion trustable - as I do - as it is also following logic and a minimal knowledge of the FPGA world, why do they assume that this is (one of) the best solution for projects oriented to hobbyists and makers? Just based this consideration on the price of this board respect he rest of the family or competitors?

I have approached in past a couple of very difficult problems based on FPGA. I found this kind of logic a sort of miracle for the possibilities and flexibility but what I discovered in that period is that when you join a class of devices it is not easy to abandon them: most of the FPGA compilation is done by the software logic "interpreting" your design to create the gates. And this sort of fuzzy behaviour vary by platform to platform making almost difficult to move the knowledge to different FPGA family products. But maybe my knowledge is a bit outdated...

The point is that under this vision, if this producer finds the right way to evangelise a wide group of users investing on them this contributes creating a robust market. As far as I know at the date, what can be considered the best FPGA approach model is where the better and cheaper development platforms are offered including examples etc. reaching as much as possible new potential users.

Enrico

Enrico Miglino wrote:

 

... why do they assume that this is (one of) the best solution for projects oriented to hobbyists and makers? ...

Enrico, I don't see this claim being made.

The description says it's for entry-level Zynq developers.

Maybe I have included this board as part of the "easy" (?) low-entry series, as it is based on the same Zynq-7000 ICs family like the just mentioned

Development Board, Arty Z7, APSoC Zynq-7000 All Programmable SoC, Makers and Hobbyists

Enrico

That board is based on the Arty family, without embedded ARM. It's simpler, but not something that helps new Zynq designers.

I think the board is good for the goals it has set for ourselves. The comments seem to discuss other goals...

That board is based on the Arty family, without embedded ARM. It's simpler, but not something that helps new Zynq designers.

I think the board is good for the goals it has set for ourselves. The comments seem to discuss other goals...