On Monday 11 July 2005 12:43, Matt Ettus wrote:
> Sounds like a very interesting application. However, getting all those
> bits in and out of the computer would only solve half the problem. You
> need to be able to perform computations on that data, and your PC would
> not be able to keep up. Th
> The USRP is capable of sampling 256MS/s (64MS/s across four channels), so you
> need 256MB/s to not lose data, if you are interested in, say, doing a
> continuous spectrum capture across a 128MHz band. We have an application for
> Radio Astronomy that involves interferometry where bandwidth
On Sunday 10 July 2005 06:20, Tim Ansell wrote:
> Forgive me if I'm wrong (I only kinda lurk, rather then participate),
> but wasn't the whole idea of Gigabit Ethernet to allow long cable runs?
Partially. There are other advantages to GigE; but I'm kindof just mentioning
alternatives.
> So that
> For LVD Ultra 320 SCSI, the max bus length (terminator to terminator) cannot
> exceed 12 meters (39 feet).
>
> For single-ended (non-twisted pair cable) the max length varies according to
> speed. For 40MB/s (20 megatransfers per second) SE can go 1.5 meters; for
> 20MB/s 3 meters, and for
On Sunday 10 July 2005 04:13, Matt Ettus wrote:
> Lamar Owen wrote:
> >After a brainstorming session at PARI, I've come up with an alternative to
> >either USB or GigE, with up to three times the throughput of GigE.
> >
> >Ultra320 SCSI.
>
> Interesting idea. How about Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) o
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 11:14:55AM -0400, Lamar Owen wrote:
> After a brainstorming session at PARI, I've come up with an alternative to
> either USB or GigE, with up to three times the throughput of GigE.
>
> Ultra320 SCSI.
Interesting idea.
Anybody have any data on the *real* performance of
Lamar Owen wrote:
After a brainstorming session at PARI, I've come up with an alternative to
either USB or GigE, with up to three times the throughput of GigE.
Ultra320 SCSI.
Interesting idea. How about Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) or Serial ATA?
On the other hand, do you really need much
On Saturday 09 July 2005 12:58, David Carr wrote:
> How many pins does Ultra320 require, is it 32x2 (differential) = 64?
The connector is a 68 pin connector, and the bus is 16 bits. By using two 68
pin connectors you can get 32 bits wide; very few host adapters are available
to do that, but tha
Lamar,
Sounds like a very good idea. I haven't read the SCSI spec before so
would you pardon a few questions?
How many pins does Ultra320 require, is it 32x2 (differential) = 64?
Also what are the max cabling lengths at this speed?
What is the clock rate on those pins?
You mention the ability
After a brainstorming session at PARI, I've come up with an alternative to
either USB or GigE, with up to three times the throughput of GigE.
Ultra320 SCSI.
Pros:
1.) Standard software interface from the Linux side (libscg like used for
CD
burners);
2.) Scalable throughput with PCMCIA
10 matches
Mail list logo
