http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/07/nvidia-i500-soft-modem/ From Icera's previous products list, looks like the bandwidth is 5~10MHz http://www.nvidia.com/object/nvidia-icera-products.html Is it possible that Tegra 4 is yet another cheap SDR solution like rtlsdr?
on 2013-01-07 10:41
on 2013-01-07 17:39
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 4:08 AM, est <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/07/nvidia-i500-soft-modem/ > > From Icera's previous products list, looks like the bandwidth is 5~10MHz > > http://www.nvidia.com/object/nvidia-icera-products.html > > Is it possible that Tegra 4 is yet another cheap SDR solution like rtlsdr? > Looks interesting. I'd be interested to see what products come out that we could get access to (physical and logical). Tom
on 2013-01-07 18:02
I don't have high hopes for this specific chip - I guess the IC will be hard to buy and the modem feature on built devices will hard to hack, lacking source and documentation for its drivers, just as Android devices are hard for cyanogenmod developers to hack with. But these news do give some hope, the hope that more accessible high-end ARMs chips like TI's and Freescales' will follow up and incorporate these features in the future. Indeed, I am already working on a beaglebone-based SDR and this would be great. 2013/1/7 Tom Rondeau <email@example.com>
on 2013-01-07 18:30
> I don't have high hopes for this specific chip - I guess the IC will > be hard to buy and the modem feature on built devices will hard to > hack, lacking source and documentation for its drivers, just as > Android devices are hard for cyanogenmod developers to hack with. > > But these news do give some hope, the hope that more accessible > high-end ARMs chips like TI's and Freescales' will follow up and > incorporate these features in the future. Indeed, I am already working > on a beaglebone-based SDR and this would be great. > It looks to me like this SoftModem chip is just an array of speciality CPUs. What I want to see is details of ADC/DAC and the RF-to-baseband transceivers -- those aren't part of the same chip. -- Marcus Leech Principal Investigator Shirleys Bay Radio Astronomy Consortium http://www.sbrac.org
on 2013-01-07 23:23
Can anybody explain the difference between this softmodem and other existing wireless baseband programmable processors? My understanding is that, also as Marcus mentioned, it provides more flexibility by this array of special CPUs instead of the prefixed functions/blocks, within this chip. Otherwise, it won't bring big novelty. As to the ADC/DAC and RF part, maybe we need to wait for the whole SDR solution to be unveiled. On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Marcus D. Leech <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >> It looks to me like this SoftModem chip is just an array of speciality > > > > ______________________________**_________________ > Discuss-gnuradio mailing list > Discussemail@example.com > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/**listinfo/discuss-g... > -- Alex, *Dreams can come true just believe.*
on 2013-01-08 18:40
According to this web page: http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/30024-icera-i500... And the features of Icera's previous platforms: http://www.nvidia.com/object/nvidia-icera-products.html On the photo from CES, Icera i500 platform has 8 processors on it, each one contains its own memory. From Icera's product feature page, each platform contains one baseband chip and one RF IC. I think the photo depicted on CES is the baseband chip only. So this SDR platform contains 8 processors, probably specialized digital signal processors that have their own unique instruction set. Icera does not provide any hardware/software development tool, e.g. compiler, assembler, or emulator. So the instruction set is not open. They provide whole baseband chip with physical/protocol layer in software, encrypted I guess. From normal user's point of view, it will be hard to hack. I know this because I am also from communication IC industry, even we have flexible processors or coprocessors, we'll make it hard to hack. :p But I won't say it's impossible, it just takes a lot of time. With those hacking time, I'd rather spend time to build a scalable computer farm that can do distributed SDR. I think the next move of GNU Radio is toward this by introducing ICE? Best Regards, Albert Huang Alex Zhang <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Marcus D. Leech <email@example.com> wrote: >>> >> > > > drivers, just as Android devices are hard for cyanogenmod > speciality CPUs. What I want to see is details of ADC/DAC and the > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss-gnuradio mailing list > Discussfirstname.lastname@example.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio -- Albert Chun-Chieh Huang(黃俊傑) Blog: Random Notes, http://alberthuang314.blogspot.com/
on 2013-01-10 07:55
Hi Albert, If that is as you said, Icera won't open the instruction set and develop tool, and all the software are encrypted. Then this chipset is not suitable for people like GNU Radio guys to DIY something. So, what is the major market of this chipset? Cellphone manufactor? Let them to develop more diverse products? I paid attention to Icera's solution for a long time. I hope there will be a small chipset which can be used as CPU plus USRP, with low power comsumption, suitable for mobile terminal. Based on your knowledge on industry, do you think when and what kind of solution may come to market? What is 'a scalable computer farm that can do distributed SDR' that you said? Regards Lin 2013/1/9 Albert Chun-Chieh Huang <email@example.com>
on 2013-01-14 15:40
Hi, Lin, According to Icera's previous product lines, there is no any documentation for instruction sets. I think their market is the same as Qualcomm's, i.e. cell phone manufactorurs. TI has a digital signal processor C6670, which targets base stations. It contains some coprocessors, e.g. turbo encoder/decoder, FFT coprocessors, to perform signal processing tasks. TI provides detailed documentation for DSP instruction set as well as these coprocessor configuration. IMHO, TI C6670 is more suitable for GNU Radio guys to DIY something. C6670 EVM has Gigabit Ethernet interface to connect to USRP N2xx and is sold at the price of USD$599. You can find information for C6670 at http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/C6670 IMHO, to do SDR on "generalized" CPU like x86 is very difficult to achieve low power consumption if the targeted standard is cellular communication. I would guess that Icera's approach is using some SIMD processors with instruction set specialized for signal processing tasks, such as FFT, Turbo codec, Rake receivers. Optimizing programs with that kind of instruction set requires long-time training and careful tuning. And I guess they use assembly to write these programs in order to save memory footprint and hence reduce die size of the chip. But that's just my guess. Software radio, as I imagine and expect, would be very easy to program in high level language with a lot of flexibility and many already-existed components. If computing power is not enough to perform real-time communication on a single computer, it is reasonable to split tasks among several computers. On ICE's website, it is compared to CORBA, which is a distributed computing framework/service. By introducing ICE into GNU Radio, as I expect happily, would make distributed SDR possible, that means if we need more computing power for real-time communication, we might be able to add more computers with careful splitting tasks among these computers! And these programs are written in high level languages! That makes developing communication more enjoyable than writing and tuning assembly code! Cheers, Albert Lin HUANG <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > comsumption, suitable for mobile terminal. Based on your knowledge on >> that can do distributed SDR > will be a small chipset which can be used as CPU plus USRP, with low > I'd rather spend time to build a scalable computer farm > that can do distributed SDR > > > -- Albert Chun-Chieh Huang(黃俊傑) Blog: Random Notes, http://alberthuang314.blogspot.com/
on 2013-01-15 09:40
Thanks for your opinion sharing. I'll read the links you gave. I'm thinking that the advantage of software radio is its flexibility but this flexibility is constrained by standards of telecommunication. I mean when you create a telecom device you have to follow standard, so that less space is left for your innovation. That's why software radio is majorly used in research activities or military systems. In consumer electronic products, ASIC is always the best performance-price choice. Only when the two ends (network and terminal) of telecommunication can be self-defined, the constrain of standard is broken then people can create anything freely. Anyway, this may be a wrong proposition, and an impossible mission. Regards Lin 2013/1/14 Albert Chun-Chieh Huang <email@example.com>
on 2013-01-15 10:24
> In consumer electronic products, ASIC is always the best performance-price choice. Even with LTE you have to deal with 12 freq. bands?
on 2013-01-17 03:50
Well, for this case, is the solution with multiple RF modules plus one BB module OK? The BB modules for different bands are almost same, right? Or do you think a very wide band RF module plus a BB module is better? I'm not expert on chipset design. What's your opinion? There are different levels of flexibility. As we talk about software radio, Icera's solution may be not 'soft' enough, but it may be a good choice for cellphone manufacturer. BR Lin 2013/1/15 est <firstname.lastname@example.org>
on 2013-04-25 03:42
Hello, just an update for the official i500 spec whitepaper. http://www.nvidia.com/docs/IO/116757/NVIDIA_i500_w...