Comparison of Baseband Processors  in Terms of Realization SDR-Transceivers

Abstract

Software-defined Radio is a programmable transceiver with the capability of operating various wireless communication protocols without the need to change or update the hardware. Consequently, Software-defined Radio has earned a lot of attention and is of great significance to both academia, military and aerospace industry. Components of Software defined Radio (e.g. mixers, filters, amplifiers, modulators/demodulators, detectors, etc.) implemented by means of software on a personal computer or embedded system. Operation of signal processing are handed over to the baseband processor, rather than being done in special electronic circuits. Baseband processors are implemented through employing various types of hardware platforms, such as General Purpose Processors, Graphics Processing Units, Digital Signal Processors, and Field Programmable Gate Arrays. Each of these platforms is associated with their own set of advantages and disadvantages. In this paper was proposed a comparison of the state-of-the-art hardware platforms in the context of implementation Software defined Radio transceivers. For comparison was determined as follow criteria: computational power of hardware platform, power consumption, complexity of developing, and cost of tools and equipment. First approaches to realizing baseband processors is using a General Purpose Processor and accelerating by Graphics Processing Units. But General Purpose Processor and Graphics Processing Units execute software instructions in the sequential order. For this reason, General Purpose Processors are not convenient for high-throughput computing with real-time requirements. Also this hardware platforms have increased power consumption. This aspect does not allow use General Purpose Processor and Graphics Processing Units in small and portable Software-defined Radio transceivers. In other hand, General Purpose Processors are preferable hardware platform by researchers and beginners due to their flexibility and programmability. Therefore, General Purpose Processors and Graphics Processing Units is highly recommended for prototyping Software-defined Radio platforms. Digital Signal Processor was reviewed as alternative approach for implementing baseband processors. Digital Signal Processors is a particular type of General Purpose Processors that is optimized to process digital signals. Digital Signal Processors have similar disadvantage with insufficient computational power, but some manufacturer sell energy optimized Digital Signal Processors. Consequently, Digital Signal Processor is commonly used in small and portable Software-defined Radio transceivers. Field Programmable Gate Arrays and System-on-Chips with Field Programmable Gate Array are strongly recommended for high-performance Software-defined Radio platforms. This hardware platforms combine the flexibility of processors and efficiency of small Digital Signal Processor. Field Programmable Gate Arrays can achieve a high level of parallelism in executing digital signal processing. However, the designers must have a high degree in digital electronics and good acknowledgement of hardware description languages.  After the research, was proposed own flexible architecture Software defined Radio transceiver and methods for development.

Keywords

References

1. “RF Agile Transceiver AD9361,” Analog Devices. p. 36, 2016, URL:http://www.analog.com/static/imported-files/data_sheets/AD9361.pdf.
2. A. Haghighat, “A review on essentials and technical challenges of software defined radio,” in MILCOM 2002. Proceedings, 2002, pp. 377–382, DOI: 10.1109/MILCOM.2002.1180471.
3. M. Galloy, “CPU vs GPU performance,” 2011. [Online]. Available:https://michaelgalloy.com/2013/06/11/cpu-vs-gpu-performance.html.
4. M. Vestias and H. Neto, “Trends of CPU, GPU and FPGA for high-performance computing,” in 2014 24th International Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Applications (FPL), 2014, pp. 1–6, DOI: 10.1109/FPL.2014.6927483.
5. K. Li, M. Wu, G. Wang, and J. R. Cavallaro, “A high performance GPU-based software-defined basestation,” in 2014 48th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, 2014, pp. 2060–2064, DOI: 10.1109/ACSSC.2014.7094835.
6. S. A. Dyer and B. K. Harms, “Digital Signal Processing,” in Advances in Computers, Elsevier, 1993, pp. 59–117, URL: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0065245808604039.
7. A. Gatherer, T. Stetzler, M. McMahan, and E. Auslander, “DSP-based architectures for mobile communications: past, present and future,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 84–90, 2000, DOI: 10.1109/35.815456.
8. D. Strenski, C. Kulkarni, J. Cappello, and P. Sundararajan, “Latest FPGAs Show Big Gains in Floating Point Performance.” [Online]. Available: https://www.hpcwire.com/2012/04/16/latest_fpgas_show_big_gains_in_floating_point_performance/.
9. S. Kestur, J. D. Davis, and O. Williams, “BLAS Comparison on FPGA, CPU and GPU,” in 2010 IEEE Computer Society Annual Symposium on VLSI, 2010, pp. 288–293, DOI: 10.1109/ISVLSI.2010.84.
10. K. Underwood, “FPGAs vs. CPUs: trends in peak floating-point performance,” in Proceeding of the 2004 ACM/SIGDA 12th international symposium on Field programmable gate arrays - FPGA ’04, 2004, p. 171, DOI: 10.1145/968280.968305.
11. “MATLAB HDL Coder Generate code from MATLAB code,” MATLAB. [Online]. Available: https://www.mathworks.com/products/hdl-coder.html.
12. “ZedBoardTM is a low-cost development board for the Xilinx Zynq®-7000 All Programmable SoC.” ZedBoard, URL: http://zedboard.org/sites/default/files/product_briefs/5066-PB-AES-Z7EV-7Z020-G-V3c %281%29_0.pdf.
13. “Library for interfacing with Linux IIO devices,” Analog Devices Iinc. Analog Devices Iinc, URL: https://github.com/analogdevicesinc/libiio.

License

Copyright (c) 2020 Максим Сергійович Голуб (Автор)