Hi, Leon (or others who might have some thoughts to offer.)

I noticed that you said you'd purchased one of the DM320001 products
from Microchip (or Digikey?) that uses the PIC32MX360F512L chips,
perhaps back in late November? I have some small experience of my own
with NXP 32-bit CPUs in conjunction with Paul's compiler toolset, but
I'm curious how you are feeling about the PIC32 after some experience
with it.

Many years ago, I also worked with the MIPS R2000 cpus on a custom
board design (the 8kx8 rams that were fast enough for the cache burned
a full watt each and there was only one company making them fast
enough at the time, 'performance semi') and had a chance to visit MIPS
(right near Weitek, back then) for a few days and, I guess since the
processor was new at the time, got a rather long winded design
overview directly from Dr. Hennessey. I understand the R2000 pretty
well, inside and out, but have no experience at all with the 4k stuff
or anything post-R2000 from MIPS.

Any comments from you or anyone else about the processor, tools, etc.,
would be appreciated. (I gather that hi-tech made a huge publicity
splash a while back about their OCG and the PIC32, but that kind of
stuff usually just runs off my back like water off a duck's.)

I'll be looking over some of the documentation tonight, but I thought
I'd ask for anything that is easy to say. Not looking for depth and I
do NOT have a specific project in mind for it right now, just looking
for informed reactions from developing products or just hobby things
with it in order to decide whether or not to spend some serious time
digging into for personal education, right now.

Thanks,
Jon

------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Kirwan"
To: "MSP430 list"
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 9:40 AM
Subject: [msp430] Leon_heller.. quick question about the PIC32 board you
purchased half a year ago... or others
> Hi, Leon (or others who might have some thoughts to offer.)
>
> I noticed that you said you'd purchased one of the DM320001 products
> from Microchip (or Digikey?) that uses the PIC32MX360F512L chips,
> perhaps back in late November? I have some small experience of my own
> with NXP 32-bit CPUs in conjunction with Paul's compiler toolset, but
> I'm curious how you are feeling about the PIC32 after some experience
> with it.
>
> Many years ago, I also worked with the MIPS R2000 cpus on a custom
> board design (the 8kx8 rams that were fast enough for the cache burned
> a full watt each and there was only one company making them fast
> enough at the time, 'performance semi') and had a chance to visit MIPS
> (right near Weitek, back then) for a few days and, I guess since the
> processor was new at the time, got a rather long winded design
> overview directly from Dr. Hennessey. I understand the R2000 pretty
> well, inside and out, but have no experience at all with the 4k stuff
> or anything post-R2000 from MIPS.
>
> Any comments from you or anyone else about the processor, tools, etc.,
> would be appreciated. (I gather that hi-tech made a huge publicity
> splash a while back about their OCG and the PIC32, but that kind of
> stuff usually just runs off my back like water off a duck's.)
>
> I'll be looking over some of the documentation tonight, but I thought
> I'd ask for anything that is easy to say. Not looking for depth and I
> do NOT have a specific project in mind for it right now, just looking
> for informed reactions from developing products or just hobby things
> with it in order to decide whether or not to spend some serious time
> digging into for personal education, right now.

I haven't done much with it, I just got it out of curiosity. I use PICs
quite a lot, as well as NXP ARMs, and wanted to see how it compared with the
ARM. It provides a nice upgrade path to 32-bit controllers from the 16-bit
PICs.

I evaluated an IDT MIPS controller many years ago, and like the
architecture.

The tools are good (gcc), and use the MPLAB IDE, which is very good.
Microchip support is excellent and they are very good at supplying samples.

You should join the Microchip forum and see what other users think of it.
They've been quite rude about the Hi-Tech compiler, the Microchip one seems
to be better. It's strange, as the Hi-Tech compilers for the other PICs are
pretty good.

The evaluation kit is very good value for money and well worth buying. An
expansion connector may be added.

Leon
------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 10:21:32 +0100, you wrote:

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jon Kirwan"
>To: "MSP430 list"
>Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 9:40 AM
>Subject: [msp430] Leon_heller.. quick question about the PIC32 board you
>purchased half a year ago... or others
>> Hi, Leon (or others who might have some thoughts to offer.)
>>
>> I noticed that you said you'd purchased one of the DM320001 products
>> from Microchip (or Digikey?) that uses the PIC32MX360F512L chips,
>> perhaps back in late November? I have some small experience of my own
>> with NXP 32-bit CPUs in conjunction with Paul's compiler toolset, but
>> I'm curious how you are feeling about the PIC32 after some experience
>> with it.
>>
>> Many years ago, I also worked with the MIPS R2000 cpus on a custom
>> board design (the 8kx8 rams that were fast enough for the cache burned
>> a full watt each and there was only one company making them fast
>> enough at the time, 'performance semi') and had a chance to visit MIPS
>> (right near Weitek, back then) for a few days and, I guess since the
>> processor was new at the time, got a rather long winded design
>> overview directly from Dr. Hennessey. I understand the R2000 pretty
>> well, inside and out, but have no experience at all with the 4k stuff
>> or anything post-R2000 from MIPS.
>>
>> Any comments from you or anyone else about the processor, tools, etc.,
>> would be appreciated. (I gather that hi-tech made a huge publicity
>> splash a while back about their OCG and the PIC32, but that kind of
>> stuff usually just runs off my back like water off a duck's.)
>>
>> I'll be looking over some of the documentation tonight, but I thought
>> I'd ask for anything that is easy to say. Not looking for depth and I
>> do NOT have a specific project in mind for it right now, just looking
>> for informed reactions from developing products or just hobby things
>> with it in order to decide whether or not to spend some serious time
>> digging into for personal education, right now.
>
>I haven't done much with it, I just got it out of curiosity. I use PICs
>quite a lot, as well as NXP ARMs, and wanted to see how it compared with the
>ARM. It provides a nice upgrade path to 32-bit controllers from the 16-bit
>PICs.
>
>I evaluated an IDT MIPS controller many years ago, and like the
>architecture.
>
>The tools are good (gcc), and use the MPLAB IDE, which is very good.
>Microchip support is excellent and they are very good at supplying samples.

I agree well with the above that you write. For that reason alone,
I'm considering investing time in the darned thing. Microchip
supports its tools, its chips, and its developers (smaller ones like
me, anyway) better than most.

>You should join the Microchip forum and see what other users think of it.
>They've been quite rude about the Hi-Tech compiler, the Microchip one seems
>to be better. It's strange, as the Hi-Tech compilers for the other PICs are
>pretty good.
>
>The evaluation kit is very good value for money and well worth buying. An
>expansion connector may be added.

Thanks, Leon. I'll pick one up right away -- right now, in fact.

I've skimmed the first few pages of one of the family data sheet. Not
very MIPS-like, from R2000 experience or the lecture I got from
Hennessey that day. It implements MDU 32x32 stall logic for one
thing. I seem to recall that MIPS means, Microprocessor w/o
Interlocked Pipeline Stages. And here I see some interlocks, already!
They've even added bypass muxes for reg src and dst pipeline issues.
Although I see CLO and CLZ, for example, is there a fully
combinatorial barrel shifter or not? Still looking -- may need to
visit MIPS for that, though.

Thanks,
Jon

------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

At 02:32 AM 8/6/2008, Jon Kirwan wrote:
>...
>I've skimmed the first few pages of one of the family data sheet. Not
>very MIPS-like, from R2000 experience or the lecture I got from
>Hennessey that day....

MIPS ditched that pitch as soon as it can :-)
// richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly,
please use richard at imagecraft.com)
------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:40:21 -0700, you wrote:

>At 02:32 AM 8/6/2008, Jon Kirwan wrote:
>>...
>>I've skimmed the first few pages of one of the family data sheet. Not
>>very MIPS-like, from R2000 experience or the lecture I got from
>>Hennessey that day....
>
>MIPS ditched that pitch as soon as it can :-)

Hehe. At the time, it was all about stripping away anything strictly
unnecessary that took space on the die or else acted to lengthen the
longest combinatorial pathway of any stage. Cycle rate and adding
genuine (not control or administration overhead) functional units was
the focus. They didn't have access to the Motorola or Intel fabs, so
they were stuck with low-tech fabbing and wanted to compete, anyway.
Pretty good for the time, actually (1987 was when I was doing this.)

Of course, these days, they don't even know what to do with all the
equivalents they have floating around. So the game has, of course,
changed. So yeah, I'd expect them to have long since dropped that
pitch.

Jon

------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:40:21 -0700, you wrote:

>At 02:32 AM 8/6/2008, Jon Kirwan wrote:
>>...
>>I've skimmed the first few pages of one of the family data sheet. Not
>>very MIPS-like, from R2000 experience or the lecture I got from
>>Hennessey that day....
>
>MIPS ditched that pitch as soon as it can :-)

So... what do you think of the PIC32? Worth a darn? I still haven't
had time to peruse enough to figure out if it has a combinatorial
barrel shifter or not -- do you know? The CLO and CLZ instructions
are suggestive in the one-liners I read. Any opinion I would
definitely value!

Jon

------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

I picked up one of these a few months ago, and am pretty disappinted
with it. Sure it's pretty fast, and there are a few nice features in the
instruction set, but getting information on the custom setup for
microchip has so far been impossible. At the end of the day it is a fast
core, but the peripherals don't complement the core too well. With that
amount of processing grunt it would have been nice to have some
new/different or simply better peripherals, but the A/D is only 10 bits,
and 500ksps, there are only 5 each captures and compares, the comms
peripherals are nothing different to the PIC24 parts, or a whole slew of
ARM stuff. The RTCC is OK, but not exactly gee whiz, and I haven't been
able to think what I mght want the PSP for.

Microchip are running what looks like the best contest I've seen, but
frankly I can't think of anything that justifies the use of the PIC32
that I couldn't implement on other smaller devices, sure I could use C,
write inefficient code and still get it to perform, but that isn't a
good enough reason to choose it, it goes against the grain to use overkill.

Sure there are likley applications out there that need this sort of
power, but most of those could probably be well served with a similarly
priced and usually better peripherally equipped dsp/micro type device.

Al

Jon Kirwan wrote:

>On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:40:21 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>
>>At 02:32 AM 8/6/2008, Jon Kirwan wrote:
>>
>>
>>>...
>>>I've skimmed the first few pages of one of the family data sheet. Not
>>>very MIPS-like, from R2000 experience or the lecture I got from
>>>Hennessey that day....
>>>
>>>
>>MIPS ditched that pitch as soon as it can :-)
>>
>>So... what do you think of the PIC32? Worth a darn? I still haven't
>had time to peruse enough to figure out if it has a combinatorial
>barrel shifter or not -- do you know? The CLO and CLZ instructions
>are suggestive in the one-liners I read. Any opinion I would
>definitely value!
>
>Jon
>
>------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 05:50:18 +0930, Al wrote:

>I picked up one of these a few months ago, and am pretty disappinted
>with it. Sure it's pretty fast, and there are a few nice features in the
>instruction set, but getting information on the custom setup for
>microchip has so far been impossible. At the end of the day it is a fast
>core, but the peripherals don't complement the core too well. With that
>amount of processing grunt it would have been nice to have some
>new/different or simply better peripherals, but the A/D is only 10 bits,
>and 500ksps, there are only 5 each captures and compares, the comms
>peripherals are nothing different to the PIC24 parts, or a whole slew of
>ARM stuff. The RTCC is OK, but not exactly gee whiz, and I haven't been
>able to think what I mght want the PSP for.

Thanks, Al. Luckily, I didn't send out the order just yet (thought I
would, but other things impinged at the time and so maybe I can let
your comment cause me to hold of for a day or two [or more.]) I just
got back in from working on the property, but I still have a few
errands to run (pressure clamp for a water pipe, etc.) before the day
runs out. So I may not get to reading more for at least another half
day. Oh, well.

>Microchip are running what looks like the best contest I've seen, but
>frankly I can't think of anything that justifies the use of the PIC32
>that I couldn't implement on other smaller devices, sure I could use C,
>write inefficient code and still get it to perform, but that isn't a
>good enough reason to choose it, it goes against the grain to use overkill.

I haven't looked at the contest, so no idea about that. And I
understand the point out wondering what applications might need that
beast.

>Sure there are likley applications out there that need this sort of
>power, but most of those could probably be well served with a similarly
>priced and usually better peripherally equipped dsp/micro type device.

Did you have any in mind when writing that?

Jon

------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Hi Jon. Well I figured Microchips own dsPIC33, or TMS320LF240x parts
would easily do the job, and in the case of the TMS have better
peripherals, then some of the low end ADSP parts also have a better
peripheral mix, or 'stronger' peripherals. Of course some of the faster
ARM7 variants have the same sort of raw throughput.

Even the lowly MSP430 has a better peripheral mix, although they don't
compete on speed. The PIC2 doesn't even have a DAC Let alone anything
really impressive.

However I don't regret getting the eval kit, and would suggest that it
is a worthwhile move if only to llearn something new. I am by no means
finished with it yet, I've really had little more than a minor foray
with it, nothing like a full eavaluation, but was not excited enough by
it to make it a high priority. Now if they could produce that poiwer at
1mA I would definitely sit up and take notice!

Cheers

Al

Jon Kirwan wrote:

>On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 05:50:18 +0930, Al wrote:
>
>
>
>>I picked up one of these a few months ago, and am pretty disappinted
>>with it. Sure it's pretty fast, and there are a few nice features in the
>>instruction set, but getting information on the custom setup for
>>microchip has so far been impossible. At the end of the day it is a fast
>>core, but the peripherals don't complement the core too well. With that
>>amount of processing grunt it would have been nice to have some
>>new/different or simply better peripherals, but the A/D is only 10 bits,
>>and 500ksps, there are only 5 each captures and compares, the comms
>>peripherals are nothing different to the PIC24 parts, or a whole slew of
>>ARM stuff. The RTCC is OK, but not exactly gee whiz, and I haven't been
>>able to think what I mght want the PSP for.
>>
>>Thanks, Al. Luckily, I didn't send out the order just yet (thought I
>would, but other things impinged at the time and so maybe I can let
>your comment cause me to hold of for a day or two [or more.]) I just
>got back in from working on the property, but I still have a few
>errands to run (pressure clamp for a water pipe, etc.) before the day
>runs out. So I may not get to reading more for at least another half
>day. Oh, well.
>
>
>
>>Microchip are running what looks like the best contest I've seen, but
>>frankly I can't think of anything that justifies the use of the PIC32
>>that I couldn't implement on other smaller devices, sure I could use C,
>>write inefficient code and still get it to perform, but that isn't a
>>good enough reason to choose it, it goes against the grain to use overkill.
>>
>>I haven't looked at the contest, so no idea about that. And I
>understand the point out wondering what applications might need that
>beast.
>
>
>
>>Sure there are likley applications out there that need this sort of
>>power, but most of those could probably be well served with a similarly
>>priced and usually better peripherally equipped dsp/micro type device.
>>
>>Did you have any in mind when writing that?
>
>Jon
>
>------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )