believe I also got 12.5MHz BW per channel (I'll check if I get a
chance), but then, this is two channels, not one full 25MHz capture.
Dave.
- Original Message
From: Sharif Shaher
To: Marcus D. Leech
Cc: discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
Sent: Sat, 9 October, 2010 2:47:53
Subject: Re: [Disc
), but then, this is two channels, not one full 25MHz capture.
Dave.
- Original Message
From: Sharif Shaher
To: Marcus D. Leech
Cc: discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
Sent: Sat, 9 October, 2010 2:47:53
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Intel Atom Processor
Hi Marcus,
Thank you so much for doing th
Hi Marcus,
Thank you so much for doing this and for informing all of us of your
results.
Helpful to us, and probably to others.
On 10/8/2010 6:21 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
On 10/08/2010 04:44 PM, Sharif Shaher wrote:
Hi Marcus,
That would be great, and greatly appreciated, we are just n
On Oct 8, 2010, at 6:21 PM, "Marcus D. Leech" wrote:
> On 10/08/2010 04:44 PM, Sharif Shaher wrote:
>> Hi Marcus,
>>
>> That would be great, and greatly appreciated, we are just not sure
>> is if there is a fighting chance or not...thus the question to the forum.
>>
>> Thanks so much,
>> Shari
On 10/08/2010 04:44 PM, Sharif Shaher wrote:
> Hi Marcus,
>
> That would be great, and greatly appreciated, we are just not sure
> is if there is a fighting chance or not...thus the question to the forum.
>
> Thanks so much,
> Sharif
On my dual-core Atom D-510 at 1.67GHz, with 4GB of memory, and a
No, not really, its an indefinite data collection.
On 10/8/2010 4:40 PM, Marc Epard wrote:
On Oct 8, 2010, at 1:46 PM, Sharif Shaher wrote:
We are thinking of using a 1.6GHz Intel Atom processor based PC with multiple
gigabit Ethernet ports
to collect data from multiple USPR2s and save that
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Sharif Shaher wrote:
> In both instances you guys were doing more than what we hoped to do, we
> are not going to demod nor run an FFT, just store the data to diskgiven
> that
> do you still see a problem with 2 USRP2s, 4 USRP2s, 6 USRP2s using a 1.6 GHz
> atom
Hi Marcus,
That would be great, and greatly appreciated, we are just not sure
is if there is a fighting chance or not...thus the question to the forum.
Thanks so much,
Sharif
On 10/8/2010 4:35 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
On 10/08/2010 03:25 PM, Jeffrey Lambert wrote:
Running an FFT is a CPU i
On Oct 8, 2010, at 1:46 PM, Sharif Shaher wrote:
> We are thinking of using a 1.6GHz Intel Atom processor based PC with multiple
> gigabit Ethernet ports
> to collect data from multiple USPR2s and save that data off to disk. We are
> hoping to be able to
> use decimation rates as low as 4 for c
On 10/08/2010 03:25 PM, Jeffrey Lambert wrote:
> Running an FFT is a CPU intensive application, and not a bandwidth/IO
> restricted application. The comparison made here is likely not an
> accurate representation of throughput if only data stream to disk is
> the goal.
>
> ~Jeff
>
This is perfectl
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Jeffrey Lambert wrote:
> Running an FFT is a CPU intensive application, and not a bandwidth/IO
> restricted application. The comparison made here is likely not an accurate
> representation of throughput if only data stream to disk is the goal.
>
> ~Jeff
FFT's are
Running an FFT is a CPU intensive application, and not a bandwidth/IO
restricted application. The comparison made here is likely not an
accurate representation of throughput if only data stream to disk is the
goal.
~Jeff
I run Gnu Radio on an Atom D510 system for narrow-bandwidth radiometry
In both instances you guys were doing more than what we hoped to do, we
are not going to demod nor run an FFT, just store the data to
diskgiven that
do you still see a problem with 2 USRP2s, 4 USRP2s, 6 USRP2s using a 1.6
GHz atom?
On 10/8/2010 3:08 PM, Tom Rondeau wrote:
On Fri, Oct 8,
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
> On 10/08/2010 02:46 PM, Sharif Shaher wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> We are thinking of using a 1.6GHz Intel Atom processor based PC with
>> multiple gigabit Ethernet ports
>> to collect data from multiple USPR2s and save that data off to disk.
>>
Thank you for the heads up.
On 10/8/2010 2:54 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
On 10/08/2010 02:46 PM, Sharif Shaher wrote:
Hello,
We are thinking of using a 1.6GHz Intel Atom processor based PC with
multiple gigabit Ethernet ports
to collect data from multiple USPR2s and save that data off to di
On 10/08/2010 02:46 PM, Sharif Shaher wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We are thinking of using a 1.6GHz Intel Atom processor based PC with
> multiple gigabit Ethernet ports
> to collect data from multiple USPR2s and save that data off to disk.
> We are hoping to be able to
> use decimation rates as low as 4
Hello,
We are thinking of using a 1.6GHz Intel Atom processor based PC with
multiple gigabit Ethernet ports
to collect data from multiple USPR2s and save that data off to disk. We
are hoping to be able to
use decimation rates as low as 4 for captures of shorts (16bit I and 16
bit Q). We wil
17 matches
Mail list logo
