FPGA Intellectual Property
PCI Express*, Networking and Connectivity, Memory Interfaces, DSP IP, and Video IP
6394 Discussions

DSP Builder or manually written VHDL ?

Altera_Forum
Honored Contributor II
1,772 Views

Hi everyone! 

 

I'm currently working on a university project, based on the implementation of FFT on a FPGA. I read about the possibility to develop it using DSP builder with Matlab/Simulink. What is the best solution between a manually-developed FFT processor or the one obtained with Simulink and DSP Builder? I think that the former could be more customizable, while the latter allows to reach the goal quickly. Tell me if i am wrong. 

 

 

Thanks in advance. 

 

Matteo
0 Kudos
6 Replies
Altera_Forum
Honored Contributor II
379 Views

Hello, 

 

I'm a student myself just now doing the "final" project also :) 

 

I would say it depends a bit on your goal with this project. To learn VHDL, how to use tools and IP cores, or just to produce some final "device"? 

 

 

There is an FFT megafunction available also btw, in DSP->Transforms. It might suit your need :) 

 

 

M.
0 Kudos
Altera_Forum
Honored Contributor II
379 Views

The goal is to produce a final "device", because i've already learned VHDL. What about the megafunction ? is a block belonging to Simulink ? could you tell me more about that ? 

 

thank you
0 Kudos
Altera_Forum
Honored Contributor II
379 Views

The megafunctions do not belong to Simulink. They are Altera IPs that can be instantiated via Quartus. Open up Quartus, go to Tools -> MegaWizard Plug-In Manager. Go through the help to learn more. 

 

If you are going to use the megafunctions, you should move this discussion to another sub-forum (since this sub-forum is for DSP builder :D). 

 

Bharath
0 Kudos
Altera_Forum
Honored Contributor II
379 Views

Bharath thank you for the answer. Do you think that the megacore function for FFT is better than designing a custom version ?

0 Kudos
Altera_Forum
Honored Contributor II
379 Views

 

--- Quote Start ---  

Bharath thank you for the answer. Do you think that the megacore function for FFT is better than designing a custom version ? 

--- Quote End ---  

 

 

Depends on what you mean by "better". Using the megacore FFT means you don't have to be worry about converting a mathematical algorithm for realization on an FPGA (this may take quite a long time). But you still need to understand the functionality of the megacore module and have a basic understanding of FFT so you can use the megacore IP in your design.  

 

Good luck. 

 

Bharath
0 Kudos
Altera_Forum
Honored Contributor II
379 Views

With "better" i mean in terms of time needed to perform the computation by the "processor". I'm going to write my doubts in another thread because now i'm off-topc. Thank you!

0 Kudos
Reply