top | item 9759924

(no title)

monochr | 10 years ago

Again, I'm not seeing why it was 33kHz exactly. It sounds like OP just used the wrong prefix.

discuss

order

tcas|10 years ago

I think it was just lowering the number by a few orders of magnitude to compensate for the effects and logic propagation delay (e.g. I think he said he's using a ripple adder which has a critical path dependent on the bit length), not a precise calculation exact number. My gut instinct says it's probably the right order of magnitude though.

You could probably run the long stretches at a much higher clock rate or make the design run on asynchronous clock domains if you use good serialize/deserialize units.