Did Altium backpedal on FPGAs

[Bud]

I cant find FPGA projects or device support in v17 anymore.

[Bud]

...No, I figured out I did not install FPGA support initially. It is still there.

[EEVblog]

Yes, it's not in the in default install.

Of course Altium bet the entire company on the future of FPGA's and lost, almost losing the company in the process.
Once they booted Nick Martin out they dropped the FPGA dream like a hot potato and what do you know, the company shares went from 10 cent to 10 dollars.

[Bud]

Yes, it's not in the in default install.

Not being in default install causes Embedded Tasking module to horribly crash and be unusable unless you install FPGA support. Just went through nightmare of figuring this out. I think this is ridiculous.

[DerekG]

Not being in default install causes Embedded Tasking module to horribly crash and be unusable unless you install FPGA support. Just went through nightmare of figuring this out. I think this is ridiculous.

Yes, and I think you will find that Altium has not kept up with the latest FPGA targets. This is why many people use the dedicated manufacturers programming software instead.

[EEVblog]

Yes, it's not in the in default install.

Not being in default install causes Embedded Tasking module to horribly crash and be unusable unless you install FPGA support. Just went through nightmare of figuring this out. I think this is ridiculous.

I shouldn't laugh, but  at Altium
Even sillier is the lack of any Vault or component libraries installed by default, that's just insane for a PCB design package.

[Bud]

Embedded is still crashing when pressed Add Wrapper button. Does anyone know a fix ?

EDIT: this is v17.0.7,  it worked in version 16.

[tszaboo]

Embedded is still crashing when pressed Add Wrapper button. Does anyone know a fix ?

EDIT: this is v17.0.7,  it worked in version 16.

No. Why would we use a PCB editor to make software? Or FPGA?

[Bud]

How about me not wanting to spend another grand or give for a compiler with rich optimization?
I want to try what is there, it would be a crime not to.

[Bassman59]

Not being in default install causes Embedded Tasking module to horribly crash and be unusable unless you install FPGA support. Just went through nightmare of figuring this out. I think this is ridiculous.

Yes, and I think you will find that Altium has not kept up with the latest FPGA targets. This is why many people use the dedicated manufacturers programming software instead.

That's backwards. Most FPGA people use the dedicated manufacturers' software and the PCB layout guys were asking, "why is this FPGA crap in the board-design software?" As such, the Altium FPGA stuff was rarely used.

[Someone]

How about me not wanting to spend another grand or give for a compiler with rich optimization?
I want to try what is there, it would be a crime not to.

Give it a try, for all the hate it gets on here you've got a nice environment for FPGA coding even if you don't use any of the schematic/pcb integration or their integrated libraries and compiler (which all can be useful alone). Looking at it as a big pile of features, very few people use them end to end, but they are some good tools to leverage.

[Bud]

To add to the insult, their techsupport made an effort to actually DISCOURAGE me from using embedded and FPGA in their product. Now, THAT is funny
 

[EEVblog]

That's backwards. Most FPGA people use the dedicated manufacturers' software and the PCB layout guys were asking, "why is this FPGA crap in the board-design software?" As such, the Altium FPGA stuff was rarely used.

Especially when Altium Designer came standard with FPGA tools, and PCB design was optional extra. No, I'm not kidding, they actually did that.

[carljrb]

It's great that they're investing in their core product again instead of the FPGA stuff no one was using nor wanted.

As far as parts lib, a whole lot of us (professional users at least -- their core market) wouldn't use them anyway. It's just the nature of how Altium works. Everybody uses their mechanical layers for different purposes and what not. Then you have the market separated into big groups (metric vs imperial units), different methodologies (part naming, zero orientation, etc), different uses and what not. It just wouldn't work IMO. As far as Vault goes, to me, it's more of a complication than anything (it's not solving *any* problem we actually have) and they really want to use it as a way to separate people from their money... It's a lot of thousands of dollars in license/maintenance fee for something of zero value (that's the way it looks to me at least).

If anything, it's not the lack of part libs that makes it hard to get started "right" with altium IMO. It's learning how it all works (and keeping up with the new stuff too), and then also having pre-made templates for *everything*: various schematic sheet formats, a few PCB templates with preset "typical" stackups/mechanical layers already renamed/layer pairs created/rules already tweaked/favorite via sizes/etc, output job templates, etc. It's a fair amount of work to do it right but it's a huge time saver and you get better, more consistent results too.

What I find more deplorable is how some things haven't gotten upgraded, like their core drawing tools -- often it's a lot lot easier to draw it in solidworks then import a DXF than to draw it in Altium. Lots of things could use a lot of improvements. But I guess those 50 second unrealistic "super automatic mega routing" videos sell more licenses, so they work on those features instead. The solidworks collaboration thing was looking really promising too (importing solidwork parts directly without the STEP export/import process, bidirectional linking between both programs and all), but as we were gonna start using it for more than tests, they dropped it and now they want us to use the SolidWorks PCB Connector instead (thanks, but no thanks!)

[tszaboo]

How about me not wanting to spend another grand or give for a compiler with rich optimization?
I want to try what is there, it would be a crime not to.

Time is worth more than a software license. I took a quick look at the embedded part of Altium, the best way to describe it: Cumbersome. A good compiler costs a lot in beers, but it is 1-2 weeks of salary of an engineer. I think I can waste more time with Tasking.

[Someone]

How about me not wanting to spend another grand or give for a compiler with rich optimization?
I want to try what is there, it would be a crime not to.

Time is worth more than a software license. I took a quick look at the embedded part of Altium, the best way to describe it: Cumbersome. A good compiler costs a lot in beers, but it is 1-2 weeks of salary of an engineer. I think I can waste more time with Tasking.

What other FPGA compilers do you consider as an alternative?

[Bud]

Here it is, from Altium support:

FPGA in general is no longer actively supported or developed and if possible users should use the vendor tools or even look into tasking outside of Altium

[DerekG]

What other FPGA compilers do you consider as an alternative?

Often the compiler chosen is the one provided by the manufacturer of the FPGA parts.

A good starting point is to look at which manufacturers make a FPGA part that will suit your application, then look for how much each of those manufacturers charge for their programming software (& their hardware to program the FPGA if required).

You will find there is a large variance in the cost charged by the different FPGA manufacturers for their programming software.

Generally, manufacturers who design in FPGA do so because they are running large numbers of boards.

If you were going (for instance) to require 100,000 FPGA parts, then talk to the manufacturer about providing you their software for free (or for a heavily subsided price). You might be pleasantly surprised 

The manufacturer knows that the hard part is "getting their leg in the door". Once they have you on board for your first design, you are likely to stay with them for subsequent designs.

If a competing manufacturer can supply a part cheaper than your current provider, talk to your current provider about sharpening their pencil. 100,000 parts at $10ea is no small order in anyone's books.

[Someone]

What other FPGA compilers do you consider as an alternative?

Often the compiler chosen is the one provided by the manufacturer of the FPGA parts.

You're just showing your ignorance of the process here, the front end stage of the FPGA vendor tools is called synthesis, taking synthesizable HDL and turning it into an intermediate format. Altium includes a compiler which could produce synthesizable product from other sources. Its been a while but there may have also been some synthesis/compiler functions in Altium supporting mixed language designs with an intermediate common language.

Altium included a loose collection of helpful tools that at the time were expensive or missing in the marketplace, C to hdl, soft instrumentation, softcores and IP, hierarchical and highlighting editor, and the very useful constraints automator/editor/verification. Some of those are now included free in the FPGA vendor tools but most still have unique features.

So yeah, its worth looking at these features that are sitting there in the tools for free, even if they are discontinued.

[FrankBuss]

That's backwards. Most FPGA people use the dedicated manufacturers' software and the PCB layout guys were asking, "why is this FPGA crap in the board-design software?" As such, the Altium FPGA stuff was rarely used.

I don't know the FPGA support in Altium, but it was always some work to synchronize the pin list in the schematic with the pin description in Altera Quartus QSF files when I worked in a project with a BGA FPGA with hundreds of pins. Sometimes the FPGA developers even named it slightly different in the VHDL code than how it was named in the schematic and then all the required associations between pin numbers, which of course were also slightly different than the numbers used for the BGA balls in Eagle and the signal names. I ended up documenting it all in an external spreadsheet. And Nios was used as well, which required some more configuration and more troubles. A single integrated tool for schematic and for the software would make sense, if it is good.

Regarding a FPGA compiler: as mentioned before, the free tools from the FPGA vendors are pretty good. But you could try Active-HDL. Looks like it is integrated in Altium or can be installed as a module? I tested the standalone tool once and the simulator was nice, easier to use than the (free) Altera starter version of ModelSim and had nice static analyzers for things you could easily miss, like using unsynchronized input signals which could lead to bugs that happens only one in a million or so and that you search for days.

[tszaboo]

Tasking.

What other FPGA compilers do you consider as an alternative?

I was talking about the embedded firmware compiler. Compiler usually means software, FPGA is Implemented.
For FPGAs, I've only used ISE (and Altium ), so I really dont have the knowledge to compare.

[Someone]

That's backwards. Most FPGA people use the dedicated manufacturers' software and the PCB layout guys were asking, "why is this FPGA crap in the board-design software?" As such, the Altium FPGA stuff was rarely used.

I don't know the FPGA support in Altium, but it was always some work to synchronize the pin list in the schematic with the pin description in Altera Quartus QSF files when I worked in a project with a BGA FPGA with hundreds of pins. Sometimes the FPGA developers even named it slightly different in the VHDL code than how it was named in the schematic and then all the required associations between pin numbers, which of course were also slightly different than the numbers used for the BGA balls in Eagle and the signal names. I ended up documenting it all in an external spreadsheet. And Nios was used as well, which required some more configuration and more troubles. A single integrated tool for schematic and for the software would make sense, if it is good.

The important point is that you dont need to do all the FPGA (or software) work within Altium as it outputs common formats, so you could create just the physical constraints file and do all the other FPGA work in other tools. The pin synchronisation and then schematic level ERC captures many hours of work in a simple automated process.

[Bud]

a FPGA compiler: as mentioned before, the free tools from the FPGA vendors are pretty good. But you could try Active-HDL. Looks like it is integrated in Altium or can be installed as a module?

Thanks, indeed, they say it is a free OEM version of Active-HDL that is included, and full version can be configured as an external tool if you have it, so integration is preserved. I will poke around to explore it.

[PCB.Wiz]

Here it is, from Altium support:

FPGA in general is no longer actively supported or developed and if possible users should use the vendor tools or even look into tasking outside of Altium

Yes trying to get into the FPGA LUT design flow, was always doomed to fail.

However, any half-decent PCB design tools should be able to Pin-Swap and even Gate Swap, and be FPGA pin-mapping aware.
ie be able to export pin-map files. Some packages can use scripts for this.

By saying a sweeping "FPGA in general is no longer actively supported or developed" they might be including some of those useful Pin-Swap abilities. 
Such is life when marketing trumps engineering....

[julianhigginson]

ooooh,  that sounds actually useful!

If I could manage FPGA pin swaps in Altium (and the original pinout definition) and just export a new constraints file for vivado to deal with, I think I'd actually like to use that part of the FPGA functionality.

[technotronix]

I agree. FPGA support is no more default.

[Bud]

Embedded is still crashing when pressed Add Wrapper button. Does anyone know a fix ?

EDIT: this is v17.0.7,  it worked in version 16.

OK they said they have flagged it as a bug and will fix this.

[richardlawson1489]

Do altium support FPGA?

[Bud]

No "support " anymore in terms of active support, only for legacy/regression purpose, i.e. trying to not break what was already there, i guess until dropping it all together at some point.

[knks]

I never used Altium so forgive me if I say something stupid …

If I have, for example, board with FPGA / CPLD and some other parts as well (74series, maybe some analog parts). Is it possible to do the simulation of this kind of board in Altium? Or any other tool?

[helius]

If I have, for example, board with FPGA / CPLD and some other parts as well (74series, maybe some analog parts). Is it possible to do the simulation of this kind of board in Altium? Or any other tool?

You want Mixed-Mode Simulation. There are systems that can do that, including NI Multisim, which is (or was) bundled with Quartus and ISE.

[T3sl4co1l]

I never used Altium so forgive me if I say something stupid …

If I have, for example, board with FPGA / CPLD and some other parts as well (74series, maybe some analog parts). Is it possible to do the simulation of this kind of board in Altium? Or any other tool?

Some tools, perhaps.  You won't find general SPICE models of most of those things.  You're much better off testing each subcircuit on its own.  And of those, only the analog section needs SPICE simulation, if at all.  The digital section can be simulated or emulated with an event-driven simulator.  (There are mixed signal SPICE environments (Altium uses SimCode), but they usually suck.)

After all, if you're not doing unit testing, what hope do you have to test the whole freakin' thing?

Tim

[ahbushnell]

There is a Spice program called Tina that will do mixed mode with VHDL and spice.  It's reasonably priced.  There is a free version from TI.  I don't know if it has VHDL. 
I use it when my spice modeling requires complicated controls that are not easy to implement in spice.

www.tina.com

Andy

[treecatt]

FYI, according to my sale representative and his manager fpga development has been completely removed from the upcoming AD18. I consider this unfortunate. I've used this functionality for years for relatively simple one time test boards. Would do any really complicated fpga development in AD but it was great for relatively simple glue logic for a board used for testing products.

[DerekG]

fpga development has been completely removed from the upcoming AD18

Well, just keep your copy of Altium 18 loaded so you can continue to use it.

Altium have done such a poor job of FPGA implementation compared to the OEM vendors that very few people bother with it in Altium. Altium management have now realised this after 15 years & have now decided to dump it accordingly.

[EEVblog]

FYI, according to my sale representative and his manager fpga development has been completely removed from the upcoming AD18.

More than a decade later I can officially say to my former employer "I told you so"