Honored ContributorFrom Quartus compilation I see that:
EP4CE115F29C7 115k LE typical 98.46 mW max 130.41 mW 5CEBA5U19C7 77k LE typical 227.17 mW max 322.46 mW But... Cyc V shouldn't be 40% lower static power????
Honored Contributorhmmm...interesting...
are you migrating your design from CiV to CV? There are some truth in the statement though, I wouldnt bother migrating just for the 30% (even if it is true) considering the price difference and the effort re-assigning my pins to match my existing board.Honored ContributorI get another response from Service Request (n. 11160246):
Static power is dependent on density and temperature. The power reduction is based on worst case condition using higher temperature. .. this seem a ridiculous excuse.. Quartus can do only typical and maximum PowerPlay analysis.. how can a customer benefit from worst case?Honored ContributorSound confusing from the service request. Currently what we are seeing here is significant static power increase from Cyclone IV to Cyclone V. I assume that since under worst case, we already have static power reduction, typical case there should be more power reduction. Just wonder why in typical case we see power increase here. Seems to contradict with the response provided by service request. Probably this is something worth highlighting to them.
Honored ContributorBy the way, I agree with nicejob, based on the existing observation, it seems like Cyclone V will have higher power consumption than Cyclone IV. If Cyclone IV can meet your design requirement, probably you can use Cyclone IV to have better power performance.
