BDTI is well known for its software-related capabilities: performance- and power consumption-related benchmarking, for example, along with algorithm evaluation and development and optimization work. In such projects, BDTI frequently employs semiconductor manufacturers' evaluation boards and associated software toolsets, which are often combined to create development kits.

It will likely be news to none of you that the smartphone and tablet market has been on a steep ramp in recent years, and is expected to continue its aggressive growth for the foreseeable future (Figure 1):

Intel is widely regarded as being not only the world's largest semiconductor supplier, but also a leading-edge manufacturing process developer and implementer. While foundries such as TSMC are still finalizing their 20 nm processes, for example, Intel has been shipping 22 nm-based production ICs ("Ivy Bridge" CPUs) since May of last year; the company had previously showcased its first 22 nm test wafer at the September 2009 Intel Developer Forum.

Smartphones have become the most important application for high-performance, energy-efficient processors (see "ARM's 2015 Mid-Range Platform Prep: A 32-Bit Next-Step" in this month's edition of InsideDSP). That's because smartphones are a huge and growing business, and processors make a big difference in how smartphones perform – and how long their batteries last.

Let’s face it: Applications are getting more complicated.  Chips are getting more complicated.  And engineering teams are generally getting smaller, not larger.  As a result, it’s incumbent on chip vendors to provide robust, easy-to-use development kits.  Design engineers rely on these kits to quickly evaluate chips and prototype key portions of their systems.

Toward the end of an article published in the February 2013 edition of InsideDSP, analyzing BDTI's published benchmark results of Qualcomm's QDSP6 (aka "Hexagon") v4 DSP core, you'll find the following prescient quote:

In January 2013, InsideDSP covered the CEVA-MM3101, the company's first DSP core targeted not only at still and video image encoding and decoding tasks (akin to the prior-generation MM2000 and MM3000) but also at a variety of image and vision processing tasks. At that time, the company published the following table of MM3101 functions that it provides to its licensees (Table 1):

Recently I heard a presentation from a start-up chip supplier promoting a new type of programmable architecture for baseband processing in cellular base stations and handsets. The company's CEO contended that digital signal processors (DSPs) are becoming passé, soon to be replaced by more modern architectures. This caused me to think about the future of DSPs.

The tension between cost and quality is one of the fundamental tradeoffs in the design of consumer electronics devices—and many other systems. Customers predominantly select among competing products based on price, especially in these challenging economic times, but consumers are also unwilling to short-change perceived quality. For example, to minimize bill-of-materials costs, engineers prefer to incorporate low-cost speakers in their designs.

The cellular base station and its associated infrastructure topology have remained largely unchanged throughout the industry's history to date, although upgrades have periodically occurred to address the needs of evolving voice and data standards.