Greetings Bruce, Interesting and challenging project!
On Saturday 10 October 2009 15:20, Bruce Labitt wrote: > For anyone that is remotely interested, here is the big picture for > the problem I'm trying to solve. If you are not interested, hey > delete the post. Won't irritate me in the least! > If you just transferred the data (no framing or error checking), how many bits per second must you transfer to keep up with the FFT data production? Did you explore adding a dedicated FFT card to your control computer? The algorithms they build into the hardware are much, much faster than compiled software. The local board would keep the data in your control computer - with DMA, I assume - eliminating the transfer problem. I know a fellow who now works for Apple whose job is to optimize FFT algorithms to the processor they use. Assembly language, of course. Why is Apple interested? Faster FFT, faster MP3 translation, longer battery life. A very high payoff. Jim Kuzdrall _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/