The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Measuring the Gap Between FPGAs and ASICs
Abstract
This paper presents experimental measurements of the differences between a 90-nm CMOS field programmable gate array (FPGA) and 90-nm CMOS standard-cell application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) in terms of logic density, circuit speed, and power consumption for core logic. We are motivated to make these measurements to enable system designers to make better informed choices between these two media and to give insight to FPGA makers on the deficiencies to attack and, thereby, improve FPGAs. We describe the methodology by which the measurements were obtained and show that, for circuits containing only look-up table-based logic and flip-flops, the ratio of silicon area required to implement them in FPGAs and ASICs is on average 35. Modern FPGAs also contain "hard" blocks such as multiplier/accumulators and block memories. We find that these blocks reduce this average area gap significantly to as little as 18 for our benchmarks, and we estimate that extensive use of these hard blocks could potentially lower the gap to below five. The ratio of critical-path delay, from FPGA to ASIC, is roughly three to four with less influence from block memory and hard multipliers. The dynamic power consumption ratio is approximately 14 times and, with hard blocks, this gap generally becomes smaller
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Toward embedded detection of polyps in WCE images for early diagnosis of colorectal cancer
Silva, J., Histace, A., Romain, O., Dray, X., & Granado, B. (2014) · International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11548-013-0926-3 · Cited by 1,309
Trimberger, S. M. S. (2018) · IEEE Solid-State Circuits Magazine · doi:10.1109/mssc.2018.2822862 · Cited by 77
Metadata
- Authors
- Kuon, I., & Rose, J.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems
- Published
- 2007-02
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 203-215
- ISSN
- 0278-0070 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1977850862
- Cited by
- 1,005
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 52.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Measuring the Gap Between FPGAs and ASICs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tcad.2006.884574
- The paper
- Kuon, I., & Rose, J. (2007). Measuring the Gap Between FPGAs and ASICs. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems. https://doi.org/10.1109/tcad.2006.884574
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.