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 ContributorHi,
Just to clarify if the same design file with the same logic turn on in both EP4CE115F29C7 and 5CEBA5U19C7 during compilation. Are you referring EPE spreadsheet?Honored ContributorHonored ContributorI believe the up to 40% lower power than Cyclone IV is referring to the information advertised at https://www.altera.com/products/fpga/cyclone-series/cyclone-v/overview.html.
Honored ContributorI used an 8 bit unsigned adder to test static power. I see that Cyclone V is very power hungry instead marketing say that is lower power... :(
Here other data.. http://www.alteraforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=10843&stc=1Honored ContributorIt seems like the core Cyclone V 110k static power is ~ 4x of the Cyclone IV 115k. This seems rather far from the 40% lower power. You might want to file a service request to Altera to seek further clarification.
Honored ContributorI sent a service request but I expect nothing...
28 nm LP aren't so good for power consumption... device are hotter! Only I/O thermal power dissipation is better. With Cyclone V heatsink + fan for serious design are a must! Anyone know if story is same on Xilinx side?Honored ContributorHi Flz.
From my experience in running power analysis on Cyclone V vs Cyclone III/IV. The static power is higher in Cyclone V, but the dynamic power was significantly lower. So there was a wash in or improvement in power if the total number of LE was about the same. I wasn't using the low power version of the Cyclone IV in my testing (1.0 V) core, so you need to keep that in mind if you are using the 1.0V core. Static power at smaller geometries always get worse, because leakage currents go up. Although they have improved the material and at 14 nM they are going to a different geometry to combat this issue, it still holds true, it's just not as bad as it could be... However, unless you design is just sitting idle the entire time, look at the dynamic power as well. I think the marketing term of 40% savings, has a disclaimer if you read the fine print that it's related to dynamic power.. Dynamic power is basically follows the formula Power=CV^2F so reducing the core voltage is a big win for power. You can also reduce C in smaller geometries if your traces are short because the transistors are closer together. The F term, Frequency is assumed is the same, but the benefit of smaller geometries, you can switch the transistor faster as well. PeteHonored ContributorI see static power -30% and dynamic power -50%
http://www.alteraforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=10845&stc=1 Only to sell devices? But then static is +300% and dynamic maybe -50% ?Honored ContributorHere is what support answered me:
Thank you for using mySupport. The higher power in Cyclone V is expected due to the additional features as compared to CycloneIV. User are recommended to use CycloneIV if their design could fit well into CycloneIV and not needing the additional features. I hope this answer your question. Regards, Very bad answer for -30% static power marketing guys..Honored ContributorProbably the info in the web was kind of outdated as per the service request response.
