Michael Richardson wrote:
"Thomas" == Thomas E Spanjaard <tgen%netphreax.net@localhost> writes:Thomas> Todd Vierling wrote: >> There are many such embedded/small-CPU devices (not just for VPN, >> mind you) that need low power consumption, which is certainly not >> an amd64-type-CPU strong suit. A CPU of the power you mention is >> a *very very bad* fit here; typically these machines are 486 or >> Pentium-II generation at best. It's like comparing pears >> vs. tangerines, or something like that. Thomas> I'm left wondering what use PCI64/66 is there then? Sure, Thomas> there are SoCs with PCI64/66 buses (Intel/Marvell?), but I Thomas> haven't seen any solution where they offer that as PCI slot, well... uhm. I've seen many devel boxes that have PCI slots like that. PPC440s, MIPS, etc. Do you leave it as a PCI slot? No. You buy the devices you need, and build a new board that has the things you need. Go open a Cisco VPN3K box and see what is inside.
Sure, e.g. the RoadRunner boards, but if these chips are hard to get and 'old', is there a compelling argument to still prototype for those chips, or does Broadcom offer reasonably compatible newer versions for integrators?
Cheers,
--
Thomas E. Spanjaard
tgen%netphreax.net@localhost
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature