Lpc2000

Sudip.
 
Robert and Greg are right.  Do you really need a 1 gigabit interface?
How familiar are you with Ethernet?  The LPC21xx is not really designed
for Ethernet applications.  Using a 10bit Ethernet controller designed
for a microcontroller is more appropriate for the LPC22xx family.  
 
The TLK1201 is a 10 bit serializer / deserializer ONLY.   The TLK1201
requires 10 bit data clocked at 125MHz.  You will need a high
performance FPGA to convert an 8 bit byte to a 10 bit symbol just to
think about using the TLK1201.   I use to work as a hardware engineer
for a telecom company.  There are better solutions for communicating at
1gbps speeds.
 
Ron
 
 
 
________________________________

From: lpc2000@yahoogroups.com [mailto:lpc2000@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of gregdeuerling
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 6:27 AM
To: lpc2000@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [lpc2000] Re: 100 MHz clock using LPC2138
 
*	--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, Robert Adsett
<subscriptions@a...> 
	wrote:
	> Text rearranged for clarity
	> 
	> At 08:30 AM 6/15/05 +0100, sudip nag wrote:
	> >Robert Adsett <subscriptions@a...> wrote:
	> >At 01:00 PM 6/14/05 +0100, sudip nag wrote:
	> > >Hi,
	> > >My requirement is to interface Gigabit ethernet transceiver
	> > >=500Mbps or >=64 mega bytes per second). The data feeding
	> > >technique is to supply 8 bit parallel data along with a
	> > >clock that must exceed 64 MHz(64 mega bytes per second).
	> > >Here I must synchronize each cycle of clock with data
	> > >byte.  So I need to generate such high clock frequency.
	> > >Please suggest.
	> >
	> >What chip are you using that requires that kind of minimum?
	> 
	> >I am using TLK1201 from TI for gigabit ethernet interface.
	> 
	> --
	> 
	> I think I'm beginning to understand.  I'm stepping into a
field
	> I'm not familiar with but from the looks of things that is a
	> serializer/deserializer only.  It is meant to be part of a
	> multi-chip set with another chip providing the MAC and
	> protocol functions.
	> Trying to hookup a lpc2138 directly to this strikes me as an
	> exercise in futility.  It might be possible to add FIFO
between
	> the two but that's a fair amount of work for little return.
	> Why not hookup a 10base-t module?  It would probably still be
	> faster than you can manage.
	> Robert
	
	Yup, Roberts right.  Your going to need a fifo, or better yet, a

	small FPGA.
	
	 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]