home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
-
- > The most common TI DSP is almost identical to the 56k, but each instruction takes
- > exactly twice as long to execute. The clock rate is around 50-80Mhz. I can't
- > remember the name, but it's something like TMS34010/20.
-
- > :-\ Twice as long? Ehh.. But TI have got _many_ different DSP's and the most
- > used are probably the TMS320C40 and C50. I don't know much about them, but they
- > are supposed to be fast.
-
- I didn't say ALL of TI's DSP chips were slower - just that particular one, which
- happens to be very common for general applications. It's also quite old, like the
- DSP56000.
-
- > I'd be happy just to see Falcon developers making use of the DSP we already
- > have before adding even more. Relatively slow it may be, but it's still much
- > more capable than Falcon users seem to think.
-
- > That's why I wanted a c-compiler for it.... :-)
-
- Unfortunately, C compilers don't count in this case. You just end up with
- code nearly as slow as it is on the CPU. Maybe even slower. :)
-
- If there were advantages to using C on the 56K, I'd be encouraging it all round,
- but the truth is there are no practical advantages.
-
- > It would be great to see people shake this concept of a fancy soundchip and
- > start using it to remove bottlenecks. There are a few out there using it for
- > a variety of purposes, but most still treat it like an add-on sample player.
-
- > Yepp, I know but it looks like the 56001 is an expert on soundprocessing.
-
- Yes, it's great for sound processing - but 'sound processing' is not limited
- to sample remapping, mixing and silly effects. That's about as far as it goes
- in Falcon software. What about phase vocoders, fft modelling & decent quality
- time-stretching software?
-
- It's still mostly an under-used gimmick.
-
- > Yes, there appears to be a 32-bit local data bus in addition to the standard
- > expansion slot.
-
- > Hey, that's cool. Are you sure?
-
- Well, I can see it! :)
-
- Doug.
-
-