Jump to content

Talk:Xilinx: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Jwilkinson (talk | contribs)
added new section with suggestion - 2017 Newer SoC and MPSoC Families?
Jwilkinson (talk | contribs)
Added some suggestions for pages, lists & categories for newer xilinx families or tools
Line 4: Line 4:


==2017 Newer SoC and MPSoC Families? ==
==2017 Newer SoC and MPSoC Families? ==
The page doesn't yet include the newer Zync UltraScale+ familes beyond the 7000's. Those are SoC but Xilinx now has MPSoc familes too that should be added to the article when someone gets time. Start here for details. [https://www.xilinx.com/products/silicon-devices/soc.html Xilinx - Products - SoCs & MPSoCs]. --[[User:Jwilkinson|jwilkinson]] ([[User talk:Jwilkinson|talk]]) 21:52, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
The page doesn't yet include the newer Zync UltraScale+ familes beyond the 7000's. Those are SoC but Xilinx now has [[MPSoC]] familes too that should be added to the article when someone gets time. Start here for details. [https://www.xilinx.com/products/silicon-devices/soc.html Xilinx - Products - SoCs & MPSoCs]. --[[User:Jwilkinson|jwilkinson]] ([[User talk:Jwilkinson|talk]]) 21:52, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

And on a related note, presumably the Xilinx Zync SoC and MPSoC families should probably added to some of the lists and categories a little more consistently. A few suggestions follow: --[[User:Jwilkinson|jwilkinson]] ([[User talk:Jwilkinson|talk]]) 23:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
* [[List of applications of ARM cores]]
* [[ARM Cortex-A9]], [[ARM Cortex-A53]], [[ARM Cortex-R5]],
* and perhaps some of the appropriate categories such as [[:Category:ARM architecture]], [[:Category:Semiconductor IP cores]], [[:Category:System on a chip]]
* and maybe more to [[Template:Embedded ARM-based chips]], [[Template:Application ARM-based chips]]
* [[Xilinx Vivado]] to [[List of ARM Cortex-M development tools]]
* Xilinx to [[List of semiconductor IP core vendors]], (which can use some more sections)



==February 2010==
==February 2010==

Revision as of 23:37, 3 May 2017

WikiProject iconCalifornia: San Francisco Bay Area C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Low-importance).
WikiProject iconCompanies C‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

2017 Newer SoC and MPSoC Families?

The page doesn't yet include the newer Zync UltraScale+ familes beyond the 7000's. Those are SoC but Xilinx now has MPSoC familes too that should be added to the article when someone gets time. Start here for details. Xilinx - Products - SoCs & MPSoCs. --jwilkinson (talk) 21:52, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And on a related note, presumably the Xilinx Zync SoC and MPSoC families should probably added to some of the lists and categories a little more consistently. A few suggestions follow: --jwilkinson (talk) 23:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]


February 2010

What's the correct Wikipedia tag for 'an article that appeared to be written by the company and is full of marketing weasel-speak'? 203.14.156.195 (talk) 16:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above poster, this page reads as if it was written by Xilinx, and seems to ignore the historical and current competitive nature of the programmable device market. Dstanfor (talk) 14:45, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree. I designed equipment with Xilinx parts in the 1990s and up until 2003, and there seems to be a lot of talk about more recent Xilinx logic families, but no discussion of earlier logic families (which may no longer be available for sale). Extensive discussion of current product while ignoring the historical is one of the things that makes this sound more like a sales brochure. 76.254.24.27 (talk) 18:24, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Xilinx. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:19, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]