Olin Lathrop wrote:
> N. T. wrote:
>> Have you noticed I said "at less than 22 nm process and mass
>> production"?
>
> Yes, but I ignored it since it's irrelevant. =A0We are talking about a
> relative difference between dedicated micros and soft cores. =A0You have =
to
> assume both manufacturers have access to the same fab technology. =A0With=
 the
> same fab capability, a soft core is going to take more area and therefore
> cost more than a dedicated micro.

If one core takes less area, say 0.05mm than another (0.1mm) - this
won't necessarily mean that the cost of production of the second core
will be greater (even in the case of the same fab technology). If the
cost of lunching the production of cores is, say, 5 million dollars
and first core is produced in 10 million units, but the second in 100
million, then that initial expences will add 0.5$ to the first chip
and only 0.05$ to the second. This 0.45$ difference can be greater
than just the cost of extra area per unit.

Again, as I said in my previous reply, "soft cores" are not going to
kill "dedicated" micros, they would just take their share of the
market.

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.