Section 2 Worldwide IC Vendors

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Section 2 Worldwide IC Vendors 2 WORLDWIDE IC VENDORS OVERVIEW Figure 2-1 provides a breakdown of worldwide IC sales by North American, Japanese, European, and Rest-of-World (ROW) companies for 1975-1996. As can be seen, sales by North American companies were overwhelmingly dominant in the mid-1970Õs. However, by the mid-1980Õs the majority of the worldÕs IC sales were about evenly split between North American and Japanese companies. By 1990, the Japanese had increased their share of worldwide IC sales to 48 percent, but in 1992 JapanÕs economy weakened causing their share to begin falling. A persistent economic slump in the following years coupled with the KoreansÕ success in the MOS memory market caused the Japanese share to continue falling. The Japanese share fell further in 1996 primarily because of yen to dollar exchange rate and the decline in the DRAM market. 80 70% 70 63% 60 50 48% 46% 46% 43% 42% 40 36% 36% Percent 32% 30 27% 20 18% 15%* 13%* 10% 9% 10% 9% 10 8% 6% 7% 2% 2% 2% 2% 0 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1996 (EST) Year = North American Companies = European Companies = Japanese Companies = ROW Companies * Korean companies' share was 11 percent in 1995 and 9 percent in 1996. Source: ICE, "Status 1997" 13743T Figure 2-1. Marketshares of Worldwide IC Sales ($) INTEGRATED CIRCUIT ENGINEERING CORPORATION 2-1 Worldwide IC Vendors For the past 21 years European companies have continued to represent between seven and ten percent of worldwide IC sales. Meanwhile, the share of the ROW companies (primarily Korean and Taiwanese) surpassed that of the European companies in 1992, reaching 15 percent in 1995. However, the decrease in DRAM pricing caused the ROW share to decline two percentage points in 1996. A ranking for the worldÕs top ten merchant semiconductor sales leaders in 1996 is given in Figure 2-2. The sales for these companies as a group decreased seven percent during the year. Together, they held roughly 59 percent of the overall semiconductor market. The most notable thing about this chart is that most of the companies that showed a decrease in semiconductor sales for 1996 are heavily involved in DRAMs. Another interesting note is that SGS-Thomson entered the top ten semiconductor rankings for the first time. The 1996 top fifteen worldwide integrated circuit sales leaders are listed in Figure 2-3. 1996 DRAM Share 1996 Total 1996 IC 1996/1995 Rank Discrete of 1995 Company Semi Sales Sales Percent Sales Semiconductor ($M, EST) ($M, EST) Change 1996 1995 1992 ($M, EST) Sales 1 1 3 Intel 17,800 17,800 — 31 — 2 2 1 NEC 10,250 9,200 1,050 –16 39 3 3 2 Toshiba 8,725 6,970 1,755 –18 35 4 4 5 Hitachi 8,350 7,090 1,260 –15 45 5 5 4 Motorola 8,025 6,525 1,500 –7 8 6 7 6 TI 6,750 6,700 50 –14 41 7 6 11 Samsung 6,050 5,800 250 –28 77 8 8 N/A IBM Microelectronics 5,100 5,100 — –11 35 9 9 8 Mitsubishi 4,300 3,550 750 –15 44 10 14 14 SGS-Thomson 4,200 3,590 610 18 — — — — Total 79,550 72,325 7,225 –7 — Source: ICE, "Status 1997" 18072M Figure 2-2. Worldwide Top Ten Merchant Semiconductor Sales Leaders NORTH AMERICAN MERCHANT IC VENDORS Provided in Figure 2-4 is a listing of those North American merchant IC vendors with sales of at least $50 million in 1996. The figure includes sales for both IC manufacturers and fabless IC suppliers. For the manufacturers, IC ÒsalesÓ include all revenue from ICs produced by their own fabrication facilities and by external foundries. Also, sales by the major ASIC firms (e.g., Xilinx, Altera, and LSI Logic) include revenue from sales of software design tools. On average, sales for IC vendors headquartered in North America grew four percent in 1996 compared to 33 percent in 1995. 2-2 INTEGRATED CIRCUIT ENGINEERING CORPORATION Worldwide IC Vendors Rank 1996 Total 1996/1995 Company IC Sales Percent 1996 1995 1992 ($M) Change 1 1 2 Intel 17,800 31 2 2 1 NEC 9,200 –17 3 3 5 Hitachi 7,090 –18 4 4 3 Toshiba 6,970 –19 5 6 6 TI 6,700 –14 6 7 4 Motorola 6,525 –10 7 5 9 Samsung 5,800 –29 8 8 N/A IBM 5,100 –11 9 13 15 SGS-Thomson 3,590 21 10 9 8 Mitsubishi 3,550 –20 11 11 7 Fujitsu 3,225 –20 12 14 13 Philips 3,215 10 13 10 27 Hyundai 3,150 –28 14 18 20 Siemens 2,400 1 15 12 21 LG Semicon 2,400 –33 — — — Total 86,715 –9 Source: ICE, "Status 1997" 20458B Figure 2-3. Worldwide Top Fifteen Merchant IC Sales Leaders Those companies with the strongest sales gains (in percent) for the year are shown in Figure 2-5. Note that the list includes only those companies with sales of more than $100 million thereby making the growth rates more comparable. A close look at the figure reveals two interesting points. First, most of the companies listed in the figure are involved in graphics/multimedia- related ICs, DSPs, and/or communications ICs; and second, nearly two-thirds of them are fabless. Figure 2-6 lists selected North American IC companies and the end-user markets they rely on. Those companies that sell to a balance of computer, communications, and consumer product man- ufacturers are generally more resilient to cyclical fluctuations. Those companies that are heavily dependent on the computer industry have benefited from a booming market for PCs over the past couple of years. At the same time, however, these same companies were very susceptible to hard times during the PC inventory correction period in the first part of 1996. A good example is Cirrus Logic, who in FY96 (ended March 1996) experienced its first annual net loss since its initial public offering in June 1989 (Figure 2-7). Due to the companyÕs reliance on the PC market, it dropped out of the North American top ten ranking for 1996. Only about 20 per- cent of the companyÕs revenues come from sources outside the PC market. Cirrus set a goal to increase that portion to 40 percent by the end of the decade. INTEGRATED CIRCUIT ENGINEERING CORPORATION 2-3 Worldwide IC Vendors 1995 1996/1995 1996 (EST) Company Fabless1 MOS Bipolar IC Total Percent Change MOS Bipolar IC Total 8x8 x 50 — 50 10 55 — 55 Actel x 109 — 109 38 150 — 150 Allegro MicroSystems2 45 136 181 13 51 153 204 Alliance Semiconductor x 222 — 222 –72 63 — 63 Altera x 402 — 402 22 492 — 492 AMCC2 14 37 51 18 16 44 60 AMD 2,315 115 2,430 –20 1,880 75 1,955 AMI 221 — 221 2 225 — 225 Anadigics3 51 — 51 27 65 — 65 Analog Devices2 485 442 927 33 665 565 1,230 Atmel2 634 — 634 69 1,070 — 1,070 Burr-Brown2 60 168 228 1 67 163 230 C-Cube Microsystems x 125 — 125 152 315 — 315 Catalyst x 57 — 57 14 65 — 65 Cherry Semiconductor2 3 96 99 1 6 94 100 Chips and Technologies x 137 — 137 24 170 — 170 Cirrus Logic2,3 1,187 — 1,187 –18 975 — 975 Cypress2 596 — 596 –10 535 — 535 Cyrix x 228 — 228 –34 150 — 150 Dallas Semiconductor 233 — 233 21 282 — 282 ESS Technology x 106 — 106 42 150 — 150 Exar2 x 103 35 138 –20 85 25 110 Gennum — 42 42 19 — 50 50 Harris2 435 90 525 — 435 90 525 Honeywell 52 6 58 3 52 8 60 IBM Microelectronics2 4,815 890 5,705 –11 4,300 800 5,100 IC Works2 43 — 43 16 50 — 50 ICS x 117 — 117 –23 90 — 90 IDT2 689 — 689 –21 545 — 545 IMP 70 — 70 17 82 — 82 Intel2 13,590 — 13,590 31 17,800 — 17,800 ISSI x 149 — 149 –23 114 — 114 Lattice x 185 — 185 8 200 — 200 Level One x 78 — 78 41 110 — 110 Linear Technology2 98 230 328 16 130 250 380 LSI Logic 1,268 — 1,268 1 1,280 — 1,280 1 A company is considered fabless if the majority of its wafers are manufactured by independent foundries. 2 BiCMOS ICs included under MOS. 3 GaAs ICs included under MOS. Source: ICE, "Status 1997" 9998AA Figure 2-4. North American CompaniesÕ IC Sales (³$50M, $M) 2-4 INTEGRATED CIRCUIT ENGINEERING CORPORATION Worldwide IC Vendors 1995 1996/1995 1996 (EST) Company Fabless1 MOS Bipolar IC TotalPercent Change MOS Bipolar IC Total Lucent Technologies2 1,450 230 1,680 25 1,840 260 2,100 Maxim2 345 — 345 23 425 — 425 Micrel2 47 6 53 26 60 7 67 Micro Linear2 x 18 39 57 –7 21 32 53 Microchip Technology 273 — 273 14 310 — 310 Micron 2,705 — 2,705 –36 1,740 — 1,740 Mitel Semiconductor 68 — 68 3 70 — 70 Motorola2 5,797 1,455 7,252 –10 5,225 1,300 6,525 National2 1,164 1,140 2,304 –2 1,110 1,150 2,260 Oak Technology x 212 — 212 –31 146 — 146 OPTi x 164 — 164 –27 120 — 120 Orbit Semiconductor 62 — 62 21 75 — 75 QLogic x 50 — 50 26 63 — 63 Raytheon Semiconductor2,3 37 65 102 –2 50 50 100 Rockwell Semiconductor3,4 760 — 760 97 1,500 — 1,500 S-MOS Systems x 190 — 190 –5 180 — 180 S3 x 316 — 316 42 450 — 450 Sierra Semiconductor x 189 — 189 –1 187 — 187 Silicon Storage Technology x 38 — 38 150 95 — 95 Silicon Systems2, 5 205 170 375 –47 125 75 200 Standard Microsystems 142 — 142 37 195 — 195 Symbios Logic 520 — 520 11 575 — 575 Texas Instruments2,3 5,995 1,805 7,800 –14 4,900 1,800 6,700 Trident Microsystems x 139 — 139 29 180 — 180 TriQuint3 46 — 46 26 58 — 58 Unitrode2 10 106 116 12 16 114 130 Vitesse3 47 — 47 53 72 — 72 VLSI Technology 720 — 720 — 720 — 720 VTC — 166 166 5 — 175 175 Xicor 114 — 114 12 128 — 128 Xilinx x 520 — 520 9 565 — 565 Zilog 265 — 265 13 300 — 300 Others 1,525 125 1,650 –9 1,400 100 1,500 Total 53,105 7,594 60,699 4 55,621 7,380 63,001 1 A company is considered fabless if the majority of its wafers are manufactured by independent foundries.
Recommended publications
  • 08-02-2021 Agenda Packet.Pdf
    AGENDA DELANO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING August 2, 2021 DELANO CITY HALL, 1015 – 11th Avenue 5:30 P.M. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GOVERNOR NEWSOM’S EXECUTIVE ORDER #N-08-21, THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED FULLY VIA TELECONFERENCE, DUE TO THE CURRENT RESTRICTIONS BY SAID ORDER AND CENTERS FOR DISEASES CONTROL AND PREVENTION (CDC) GUIDELINES. THE PUBLIC WILL HAVE ACCESS TO CALL IN, LISTEN TO THE MEETING AND PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT. IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNOR NEWSOM’S EXECUTIVE ORDER N-08-21, THERE WILL NOT BE A PHYSICAL LOCATION FROM WHICH THE PUBLIC MAY ATTEND. IN ORDER TO CALL INTO TH E MEETING PLEASE SEE THE DIRECTIONS BELOW. CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL PRESENTATIONS AND AWARDS Featured Pet – Tabitha PUBLIC COMMENT: The public may address the Council on items which do not appear on the agenda. The Council cannot respond nor take action on items that do not appear on the agenda but may refer the item to staff for further study or for placement on a future agenda. Comments are limited to 3 minutes for each person and 15 minutes on each subject. Please state your name and address for the record. CONSENT AGENDA: The Consent Agenda consists of items that in staff’s opinion are routine and non-controversial. These items are approved in one motion unless a Councilmember or member of the public removes a particular item. 1) Authorization to waive the reading of any ordinance in its entirety and consenting to the reading of such ordinances by title only 2) Warrant Register in the amount of $3,044,398.54 3) Minutes of regular City Council Meeting of July 19, 2021 4) Acceptance and Approval of the City of Delano Quarterly Investment Report 5) Resolution adopting the 2020-2021 Kern Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) 6) Approval of agreement with Youth Educational Sports, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Wind River Vxworks Platforms 3.8
    Wind River VxWorks Platforms 3.8 The market for secure, intelligent, Table of Contents Build System ................................ 24 connected devices is constantly expand- Command-Line Project Platforms Available in ing. Embedded devices are becoming and Build System .......................... 24 VxWorks Edition .................................2 more complex to meet market demands. Workbench Debugger .................. 24 New in VxWorks Platforms 3.8 ............2 Internet connectivity allows new levels of VxWorks Simulator ....................... 24 remote management but also calls for VxWorks Platforms Features ...............3 Workbench VxWorks Source increased levels of security. VxWorks Real-Time Operating Build Configuration ...................... 25 System ...........................................3 More powerful processors are being VxWorks 6.x Kernel Compatibility .............................3 considered to drive intelligence and Configurator ................................. 25 higher functionality into devices. Because State-of-the-Art Memory Host Shell ..................................... 25 Protection ..................................3 real-time and performance requirements Kernel Shell .................................. 25 are nonnegotiable, manufacturers are VxBus Framework ......................4 Run-Time Analysis Tools ............... 26 cautious about incorporating new Core Dump File Generation technologies into proven systems. To and Analysis ...............................4 System Viewer ........................
    [Show full text]
  • Reviving the Development of Openchrome
    Reviving the Development of OpenChrome Kevin Brace OpenChrome Project Maintainer / Developer XDC2017 September 21st, 2017 Outline ● About Me ● My Personal Story Behind OpenChrome ● Background on VIA Chrome Hardware ● The History of OpenChrome Project ● Past Releases ● Observations about Standby Resume ● Developmental Philosophy ● Developmental Challenges ● Strategies for Further Development ● Future Plans 09/21/2017 XDC2017 2 About Me ● EE (Electrical Engineering) background (B.S.E.E.) who specialized in digital design / computer architecture in college (pretty much the only undergraduate student “still” doing this stuff where I attended college) ● Graduated recently ● First time conference presenter ● Very experienced with Xilinx FPGA (Spartan-II through 7 Series FPGA) ● Fluent in Verilog / VHDL design and verification ● Interest / design experience with external communication interfaces (PCI / PCIe) and external memory interfaces (SDRAM / DDR3 SDRAM) ● Developed a simple DMA engine for PCI I/F validation w/Windows WDM (Windows Driver Model) kernel device driver ● Almost all the knowledge I have is self taught (university engineering classes were not very useful) 09/21/2017 XDC2017 3 Motivations Behind My Work ● General difficulty in obtaining meaningful employment in the digital hardware design field (too many students in the field, difficulty obtaining internship, etc.) ● Collects and repairs abandoned computer hardware (It’s like rescuing puppies!) ● Owns 100+ desktop computers and 20+ laptop computers (mostly abandoned old stuff I
    [Show full text]
  • Elementary Functions: Towards Automatically Generated, Efficient
    Elementary functions : towards automatically generated, efficient, and vectorizable implementations Hugues De Lassus Saint-Genies To cite this version: Hugues De Lassus Saint-Genies. Elementary functions : towards automatically generated, efficient, and vectorizable implementations. Other [cs.OH]. Université de Perpignan, 2018. English. NNT : 2018PERP0010. tel-01841424 HAL Id: tel-01841424 https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01841424 Submitted on 17 Jul 2018 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Délivré par l’Université de Perpignan Via Domitia Préparée au sein de l’école doctorale 305 – Énergie et Environnement Et de l’unité de recherche DALI – LIRMM – CNRS UMR 5506 Spécialité: Informatique Présentée par Hugues de Lassus Saint-Geniès [email protected] Elementary functions: towards automatically generated, efficient, and vectorizable implementations Version soumise aux rapporteurs. Jury composé de : M. Florent de Dinechin Pr. INSA Lyon Rapporteur Mme Fabienne Jézéquel MC, HDR UParis 2 Rapporteur M. Marc Daumas Pr. UPVD Examinateur M. Lionel Lacassagne Pr. UParis 6 Examinateur M. Daniel Menard Pr. INSA Rennes Examinateur M. Éric Petit Ph.D. Intel Examinateur M. David Defour MC, HDR UPVD Directeur M. Guillaume Revy MC UPVD Codirecteur À la mémoire de ma grand-mère Françoise Lapergue et de Jos Perrot, marin-pêcheur bigouden.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconfigurable Embedded Control Systems: Problems and Solutions
    RECONFIGURABLE EMBEDDED CONTROL SYSTEMS: PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS By Dr.rer.nat.Habil. Mohamed Khalgui ⃝c Copyright by Dr.rer.nat.Habil. Mohamed Khalgui, 2012 v Martin Luther University, Germany Research Manuscript for Habilitation Diploma in Computer Science 1. Reviewer: Prof.Dr. Hans-Michael Hanisch, Martin Luther University, Germany, 2. Reviewer: Prof.Dr. Georg Frey, Saarland University, Germany, 3. Reviewer: Prof.Dr. Wolf Zimmermann, Martin Luther University, Germany, Day of the defense: Monday January 23rd 2012, Table of Contents Table of Contents vi English Abstract x German Abstract xi English Keywords xii German Keywords xiii Acknowledgements xiv Dedicate xv 1 General Introduction 1 2 Embedded Architectures: Overview on Hardware and Operating Systems 3 2.1 Embedded Hardware Components . 3 2.1.1 Microcontrollers . 3 2.1.2 Digital Signal Processors (DSP): . 4 2.1.3 System on Chip (SoC): . 5 2.1.4 Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC): . 6 2.2 Real-Time Embedded Operating Systems (RTOS) . 8 2.2.1 QNX . 9 2.2.2 RTLinux . 9 2.2.3 VxWorks . 9 2.2.4 Windows CE . 10 2.3 Known Embedded Software Solutions . 11 2.3.1 Simple Control Loop . 12 2.3.2 Interrupt Controlled System . 12 2.3.3 Cooperative Multitasking . 12 2.3.4 Preemptive Multitasking or Multi-Threading . 12 2.3.5 Microkernels . 13 2.3.6 Monolithic Kernels . 13 2.3.7 Additional Software Components: . 13 2.4 Conclusion . 14 3 Embedded Systems: Overview on Software Components 15 3.1 Basic Concepts of Components . 15 3.2 Architecture Description Languages . 17 3.2.1 Acme Language .
    [Show full text]
  • GPU Developments 2018
    GPU Developments 2018 2018 GPU Developments 2018 © Copyright Jon Peddie Research 2019. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without written permission from Jon Peddie Research. This report is the property of Jon Peddie Research (JPR) and made available to a restricted number of clients only upon these terms and conditions. Agreement not to copy or disclose. This report and all future reports or other materials provided by JPR pursuant to this subscription (collectively, “Reports”) are protected by: (i) federal copyright, pursuant to the Copyright Act of 1976; and (ii) the nondisclosure provisions set forth immediately following. License, exclusive use, and agreement not to disclose. Reports are the trade secret property exclusively of JPR and are made available to a restricted number of clients, for their exclusive use and only upon the following terms and conditions. JPR grants site-wide license to read and utilize the information in the Reports, exclusively to the initial subscriber to the Reports, its subsidiaries, divisions, and employees (collectively, “Subscriber”). The Reports shall, at all times, be treated by Subscriber as proprietary and confidential documents, for internal use only. Subscriber agrees that it will not reproduce for or share any of the material in the Reports (“Material”) with any entity or individual other than Subscriber (“Shared Third Party”) (collectively, “Share” or “Sharing”), without the advance written permission of JPR. Subscriber shall be liable for any breach of this agreement and shall be subject to cancellation of its subscription to Reports. Without limiting this liability, Subscriber shall be liable for any damages suffered by JPR as a result of any Sharing of any Material, without advance written permission of JPR.
    [Show full text]
  • The Intro to GPGPU CPU Vs
    12/12/11! The Intro to GPGPU . Dr. Chokchai (Box) Leangsuksun, PhD! Louisiana Tech University. Ruston, LA! ! CPU vs. GPU • CPU – Fast caches – Branching adaptability – High performance • GPU – Multiple ALUs – Fast onboard memory – High throughput on parallel tasks • Executes program on each fragment/vertex • CPUs are great for task parallelism • GPUs are great for data parallelism Supercomputing 20082 Education Program 1! 12/12/11! CPU vs. GPU - Hardware • More transistors devoted to data processing CUDA programming guide 3.1 3 CPU vs. GPU – Computation Power CUDA programming guide 3.1! 2! 12/12/11! CPU vs. GPU – Memory Bandwidth CUDA programming guide 3.1! What is GPGPU ? • General Purpose computation using GPU in applications other than 3D graphics – GPU accelerates critical path of application • Data parallel algorithms leverage GPU attributes – Large data arrays, streaming throughput – Fine-grain SIMD parallelism – Low-latency floating point (FP) computation © David Kirk/NVIDIA and Wen-mei W. Hwu, 2007! ECE 498AL, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign! 3! 12/12/11! Why is GPGPU? • Large number of cores – – 100-1000 cores in a single card • Low cost – less than $100-$1500 • Green computing – Low power consumption – 135 watts/card – 135 w vs 30000 w (300 watts * 100) • 1 card can perform > 100 desktops 12/14/09!– $750 vs 50000 ($500 * 100) 7 Two major players 4! 12/12/11! Parallel Computing on a GPU • NVIDIA GPU Computing Architecture – Via a HW device interface – In laptops, desktops, workstations, servers • Tesla T10 1070 from 1-4 TFLOPS • AMD/ATI 5970 x2 3200 cores • NVIDIA Tegra is an all-in-one (system-on-a-chip) ATI 4850! processor architecture derived from the ARM family • GPU parallelism is better than Moore’s law, more doubling every year • GPGPU is a GPU that allows user to process both graphics and non-graphics applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Intel Quartus Prime Pro Edition User Guide: Programmer Send Feedback
    Intel® Quartus® Prime Pro Edition User Guide Programmer Updated for Intel® Quartus® Prime Design Suite: 21.2 Subscribe UG-20134 | 2021.07.21 Send Feedback Latest document on the web: PDF | HTML Contents Contents 1. Intel® Quartus® Prime Programmer User Guide..............................................................4 1.1. Generating Primary Device Programming Files........................................................... 5 1.2. Generating Secondary Programming Files................................................................. 6 1.2.1. Generating Secondary Programming Files (Programming File Generator)........... 7 1.2.2. Generating Secondary Programming Files (Convert Programming File Dialog Box)............................................................................................. 11 1.3. Enabling Bitstream Security for Intel Stratix 10 Devices............................................ 18 1.3.1. Enabling Bitstream Authentication (Programming File Generator)................... 19 1.3.2. Specifying Additional Physical Security Settings (Programming File Generator).............................................................................................. 21 1.3.3. Enabling Bitstream Encryption (Programming File Generator).........................22 1.4. Enabling Bitstream Encryption or Compression for Intel Arria 10 and Intel Cyclone 10 GX Devices.................................................................................................. 23 1.5. Generating Programming Files for Partial Reconfiguration.........................................
    [Show full text]
  • System-On-A-Chip (Soc) & ARM Architecture
    System-on-a-Chip (SoC) & ARM Architecture EE2222 Computer Interfacing and Microprocessors Partially based on System-on-Chip Design by Hao Zheng 2020 EE2222 1 Overview • A system-on-a-chip (SoC): • a computing system on a single silicon substrate that integrates both hardware and software. • Hardware packages all necessary electronics for a particular application. • which implemented by SW running on HW. • Aim for low power and low cost. • Also more reliable than multi-component systems. 2020 EE2222 2 Driven by semiconductor advances 2020 EE2222 3 Basic SoC Model 2020 EE2222 4 2020 EE2222 5 SoC vs Processors System on a chip Processors on a chip processor multiple, simple, heterogeneous few, complex, homogeneous cache one level, small 2-3 levels, extensive memory embedded, on chip very large, off chip functionality special purpose general purpose interconnect wide, high bandwidth often through cache power, cost both low both high operation largely stand-alone need other chips 2020 EE2222 6 Embedded Systems • 98% processors sold annually are used in embedded applications. 2020 EE2222 7 Embedded Systems: Design Challenges • Power/energy efficient: • mobile & battery powered • Highly reliable: • Extreme environment (e.g. temperature) • Real-time operations: • predictable performance • Highly complex • A modern automobile with 55 electronic control units • Tightly coupled Software & Hardware • Rapid development at low price 2020 EE2222 8 EECS222A: SoC Description and Modeling Lecture 1 Design Complexity Challenge Design• Productivity Complexity
    [Show full text]
  • EDN Magazine, December 17, 2004 (.Pdf)
    ᮋ HE BEST 100 PRODUCTS OF 2004 encompass a range of architectures and technologies Tand a plethora of categories—from analog ICs to multimedia to test-and-measurement tools. All are innovative, but, of the thousands that manufacturers announce each year and the hundreds that EDN reports on, only about 100 hot products make our readers re- ally sit up and take notice. Here are the picks from this year's crop. We present the basic info here. To get the whole scoop and find out why these products are so compelling, go to the Web version of this article on our Web site at www.edn.com. There, you'll find links to the full text of the articles that cover these products' dazzling features. ANALOG ICs Power Integrations COMMUNICATIONS NetLogic Microsystems Analog Devices LNK306P Atheros Communications NSE5512GLQ network AD1954 audio DAC switching power converter AR5005 Wi-Fi chip sets search engine www.analog.com www.powerint.com www.atheros.com www.netlogicmicro.com D2Audio Texas Instruments Fulcrum Microsystems Parama Networks XR125 seven-channel VCA8613 FM1010 six-port SPI-4,2 PNI8040 add-drop module eight-channel VGA switch chip multiplexer www.d2audio.com www.ti.com www.fulcrummicro.com www.paramanet.com International Rectifier Wolfson Microelectronics Motia PMC-Sierra IR2520D CFL ballast WM8740 audio DAC Javelin smart-antenna IC MSP2015, 2020, 4000, and power controller www.wolfsonmicro.com www.motia.com 5000 VoIP gateway chips www.irf.com www.pmc-sierra.com www.edn.com December 17, 2004 | edn 29 100 Texas Instruments Intel DISCRETE SEMICONDUCTORS
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Perspective and Further Reading 162.E1
    2.21 Historical Perspective and Further Reading 162.e1 2.21 Historical Perspective and Further Reading Th is section surveys the history of in struction set architectures over time, and we give a short history of programming languages and compilers. ISAs include accumulator architectures, general-purpose register architectures, stack architectures, and a brief history of ARMv7 and the x86. We also review the controversial subjects of high-level-language computer architectures and reduced instruction set computer architectures. Th e history of programming languages includes Fortran, Lisp, Algol, C, Cobol, Pascal, Simula, Smalltalk, C+ + , and Java, and the history of compilers includes the key milestones and the pioneers who achieved them. Accumulator Architectures Hardware was precious in the earliest stored-program computers. Consequently, computer pioneers could not aff ord the number of registers found in today’s architectures. In fact, these architectures had a single register for arithmetic instructions. Since all operations would accumulate in one register, it was called the accumulator , and this style of instruction set is given the same name. For example, accumulator Archaic EDSAC in 1949 had a single accumulator. term for register. On-line Th e three-operand format of RISC-V suggests that a single register is at least two use of it as a synonym for registers shy of our needs. Having the accumulator as both a source operand and “register” is a fairly reliable indication that the user the destination of the operation fi lls part of the shortfall, but it still leaves us one has been around quite a operand short. Th at fi nal operand is found in memory.
    [Show full text]
  • Motorola 68000 Opcodes
    Motorola 68000 CPU Opcodes Mnemonic Size Single Effective Address Operation Word Data Mnemonic Size Single Effective Address Operation Word Data Addressing Mode Format M Xn ORI to CCR B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 B I RTE 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 Data register Dn 0 0 0 reg ORI to SR W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 W I RTS 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 Address register An 0 0 1 reg ORI B W L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S M Xn I TRAPV 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Address (An) 0 1 0 reg ANDI to CCR B 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 B I RTR 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 Address with Postincrement (An)+ 0 1 1 reg ANDI to SR W 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 W I JSR 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 M Xn Address with Predecrement -(An) 1 0 0 reg ANDI B W L 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 S M Xn I JMP 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 M Xn Address with Displacement (d16, An) 1 0 1 reg SUBI B W L 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 S M Xn I MOVEM W L 0 1 0 0 1 D 0 0 1 S M Xn W M Address with Index (d8, An, Xn) 1 1 0 reg ADDI B W L 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 S M Xn I LEA L 0 1 0 0 An 1 1 1 M Xn Program Counter with Displacement (d16, PC) 1 1 1 0 1 0 EORI to CCR B 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 B I CHK W 0 1 0 0 Dn 1 1 0 M Xn Program Counter with Index (d8, PC, Xn) 1 1 1 0 1 1 EORI to SR W 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 W I ADDQ B W L 0 1 0 1 Data 0 S M Xn Absolute Short (xxx).W 1 1 1 0 0 0 EORI B W L 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 S M Xn I SUBQ B W L 0 1 0 1 Data 1 S M Xn Absolute Long (xxx).L 1 1 1 0 0 1 CMPI B W L 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 S M Xn I Scc B 0 1 0 1 Condition 1 1 M Xn Immediate #imm 1 1 1 1 0 0 BTST B L 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
    [Show full text]