On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Florian Faber <faber@faberman.de> wrote:
The Spartan 3 doesn't cost that much. What's in the firmware is what
makes them expensive.
Certainly the firmware development time is costly, but it's also already been spent and other than ongoing maintenance, a cost that has most likely already been recouped as well. The real question is are they continuing to put FPGA's in their new "prosumer" oriented products, such as
http://www.rme-audio.de/download/sheets/babyface_e.pdf (nb: the term "FPGA" is used 0 times in this document).
http://www.enterpoint.co.uk/moelbryn/raggedstone1.html indicates the starting point for just the spartan 3, and support chips is already above what most "prosumer" cards cost -- $100.00. Unlike custom VLSI, you can't just plop a FPGA on the pci bus. Note that the Xilinx isn't the only chip on this card:
http://www.soundworks.dk/images/rme/hdsp9632_big.jpg -- there's at least 6 other chips in the "digital" part of the card, some of high-complexity/integration/cost based on their pincount -- in addition to the Xilinx chip. That includes an additional Xilinx chip (flash memory??) that is clearly visible on the above pictured board.
RME can and will continue to do what it does very well -- and priced at "you get what you pay for rates."
Just seems that since they've got the entire thing already programmed out in an FPGA, they could build a VLSI at little incremental cost. It's not like they're starting from scratch... And given the look of the "BabyFace" perhaps some of their new products will indicate a shift towards this strategy (?).
Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I've always seen FPGA as something to use for one-off or very low-volume projects. For example
http://www.fpgaarcade.com/ :-) But I have no idea of how many cards RME sells a year. Actually, that would be a very interesting number, just to get an idea of the order-of-magnitude size of the "pro" end of the DAW market..
-- Niels