The Designer's Guide Community Forum
https://designers-guide.org/forum/YaBB.pl
Design >> RF Design >> merit of pulse swallow counter
https://designers-guide.org/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1527894107

Message started by dog1 on Jun 1st, 2018, 4:01pm

Title: merit of pulse swallow counter
Post by dog1 on Jun 1st, 2018, 4:01pm

Hello all,

I want to ask a stupid question: what is the merit of pulse swallow counter compared with, for example, synchronized binary counter (with decoder to reset, so that a step of one is achieved).

I am thinking, maybe it have less power consumption if the P and S counters are synchronized?

Thanks.

Title: Re: merit of pulse swallow counter
Post by vroy_92 on Jun 5th, 2018, 1:45am

For very high speeds of operation, a synchronous divider is a terrible option because it consumes tremendous amount of power. This is because your clock is connected to so many transistors (read:capacitance) that you will be wasting a ton of power for no reason. And if you use dynamic registers, the power consumption will be even higher. A ripple divider is the most energy efficient option but for a very high width divider, it can be hard to meet the timings at high speeds. (think about getting to MHz from GHz range).
A pulse swallow counter is in-between. Only one of the block runs at high speed clock, and meeting the timing is not difficult.

Title: Re: merit of pulse swallow counter
Post by dog1 on Aug 21st, 2018, 2:34am

Thanks V Roy, that's very helpful. so can I conclude that due to power consideration, it doesn't make too much sense to have the P and S counter in the pulse swallow counter syncronized? And that the only syncronized part may be the pre-scaler?

Also, I would like to understand better the advantage of swallow counter in high speed case. If I have a synced div4 counter followed by a ripple counter, would it be comparible in performance (power, speed) but less in complexity than a swallow counter? Or would swallow counter be higher speed? I attached a drawing to show my idea. For example, In swallow counter case, the pre-scaler count 3 or 4.

From power perspective, they are similar. Becasue they both have around 2 bits async and the rest sync.

From speed perspective, for swallow counter, the latest time for the state to change from count 3-> count 4 or the other way round is t1=N x T, where N is a integral (in this case, 1 or 2) and T is the input clock period. Then t1 must be smaller than delay1 and delay2. Whereas in the ripple counter case, T must be smaller than delay3. I think this can be an advantage for swallow counter, because t1 can be larger than T, and the delay1/2 can be similar than delay3. But I am not sure if this is the only reason that swallow counter is prefered in high speed design (eg. PLL design) over the binary structure.

Thanks.
Chen

The Designer's Guide Community Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.2.2!
YaBB © 2000-2008. All Rights Reserved.