Re: DSP or FPGA for high-speed image processing??


linnix wrote:
David L. Jones wrote:
kyori wrote:
Hi,

I am going to start a project of onboard high-speed CMOS image
processing.
I am goint to perform certain *block matching algorithm* or *Fourier
Transform* between successive frames and the fps would be 1000 or
more..


The interface between the CMOS camera and the board is standord
CamLink.
I've learned that both DSP and FPGA based circuits can do certain
onboard image processing tasks, and I'd like to know whick is better?
DSP or FPGA?


I know some corporations use FPGA based boards as development boards
for their cameras. And my cooperators have some DSP development
experiences. So, the question arises, and I want your suggestions. I'd
like to know the advantages of each choise and maybe the direction of
onboard realtime high-speed image processing.

DSP could have the following advantages:
1) Familiarity. A DSP uses a standard sequential programming language
like C that you are no doubt already familiar with, as are your
colaborators by the sound of it. There should also be plenty of code
examples available for such image processing tasks. If you have used a
microcontroller, then a DSP is essentially the same thing, except much
faster.

You can also get a process core for FPGA, then program it as simple
CPU, or CPUs.


2) Tools are much cheaper, simpler, and more robust. FPGA tools can be
horrid to set up and get working. If you are not familiar with FPGA
development tools you will have a massive learning curve.

Low end tools are cheap and often free. High end tools are expensive.


3) DSPs are ideally suited to doing FFTs. You can get FFT "cores" for
FPGA's, but it's just easier in a DSP.

An FPGA might have the following advantage:
1) Speed. Because an FPGA is dedicated hardware, you can most likely
achieve a greater real-time data throughput.

And wider data paths. For 1K (2 ^ 10) FFT, you can make 10 multiplers
and run them in parallel.


I'd recommned you do the calculations and figure out if a DSP can do
what you want in real-time, if it looks like it can with plenty of
margin then use the DSP and don't even consider using an FPGA. Perhaps
it is worthwhile investing some time and effort trying DSP first as a
simple prototype to get a feel if it has enough processing grunt for
you.

I vote for FPGA.


Dave :)



Are FPGA development tools readily available in Zhejiang, China (where
the OP is posting from)?

Michael

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: DSP or FPGA for high-speed image processing??
    ... I am going to start a project of onboard high-speed CMOS image ... DSP or FPGA? ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: DSP or FPGA for high-speed image processing??
    ... I am going to start a project of onboard high-speed CMOS image ... DSP or FPGA? ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: DSP or FPGA for high-speed image processing??
    ... I am going to start a project of onboard high-speed CMOS image ... I am goint to perform certain *block matching algorithm* or *Fourier ... DSP or FPGA? ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Neue Farnell-Website :-(
    ... Mit einem Spartan 3A DSP würde er funktionieren, ... Momentan befinden sich in dem FPGA zwei CIFDM Engines ... FFT je Engine und eben einem Vektorprozessor für so Dinge ...
    (de.sci.electronics)
  • Re: [OT?] whats a FPGA?
    ... [My desires would be better met by a 'discrete speech' rather than the ... How many analog simulation blocks can I stuff in a FPGA? ... an FPGA or a DSP is an implementation decision. ... algorithm that requires more processing than this from an 8 kHz sampled ...
    (comp.dsp)