lpmay
Joined 13 years ago
Joined 13 years ago
Increasing the symbol complexity of each channel does more than just move the bottleneck around, because it allows fewer chip to chip interconnects to carry more data.
I don't work in this regime, but as a layman I'm not convinced using full QAM for on-board chip to chip interconnects makes sense. One major advantage you natively have over the RF case is you can be easily coherent (shared clock). Throwing this away to do carrier recovery introduces a lot of complexity and potentially reduces the available bandwidth. Assuming you transmit without a carrier, can you have "baseband" QAM without a separate I and a Q signal? If you transmit an I and Q signal separately, does that not just become the same thing as two PAM-32 signals?
Of course the MSP430 doesn't have a WiFi modem or a giant hobbyist community like the ESP, so I'm really not trying to make an argument for which is "better" just trying to add some contrast to the low power features you asked about.
I believe the acoustic loss in many of these materials is also lower than the dielectric loss in most materials, which also improves filter q and achievable selectivity.
I'm not completely sure but I think this approach is preferred because shellHook only runs in `nix-shell` but if you ever wanted to `nix-build` a release it might not run.
[0] https://mesonbuild.com/ [1] https://wrapdb.mesonbuild.com/