On 2004-06-04, David Brown <david@no.westcontrol.spam.com> wrote:
>> However the GNU G is hardly optimised.
>
> I take it you mean GNU C...
>
> I don't think gcc holds many records as being absolutely the
> best optomising compiler available on any particular platform,
> but it is pretty solid on many systems, and is generally close
> to all but the most expensive commercial compilers. In
> particular, the front-end optomisations of gcc 3.4 are very
> impressive - they are driven by the big users of x86 and other
> major ports,
Fortunately for people using gcc on small uControllers like the
HC12, the x86 architecture is a rather badly designed one with
a hopelessly small set of registers -- thus requiring some
pretty sophisticated optimizations to get usable code size and
performance. If the x86 wasn't completely crippled by
backwards compatibility with the 8080, I doubt there'd be
nearly as much work put into optimization in gcc, and it
probably wouldn't be able to generate code at all for things
like the HC12.
> but work equally well on small ports - that's an advantage of
> having a clear front-end / back-end split.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Yow! I'm imagining
at a surfer van filled with
visi.com soy sauce!
Reply by David Brown●June 4, 20042004-06-04
"Chris Hills" <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote in message
news:1$JPsQAmKKwAFAvX@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In article <5h0wc.1057$Js1.907@newsfe1-win>, Roger
> <enquiries@rwconcepts.co.uk> writes
> >I agree that AVR would be well worth a look. The price vs performance is
> >very good and they are well supported with both free tools such as AVR
> >Studio (from the Atmel web site) and WinAVR (GNU C) and 3rd party
> >development tools (see avrfreaks.com).
>
>
> However the GNU G is hardly optimised.
>
I take it you mean GNU C...
I don't think gcc holds many records as being absolutely the best optomising
compiler available on any particular platform, but it is pretty solid on
many systems, and is generally close to all but the most expensive
commercial compilers. In particular, the front-end optomisations of gcc 3.4
are very impressive - they are driven by the big users of x86 and other
major ports, but work equally well on small ports - that's an advantage of
having a clear front-end / back-end split.
Reply by Chris Hills●June 4, 20042004-06-04
In article <5h0wc.1057$Js1.907@newsfe1-win>, Roger
<enquiries@rwconcepts.co.uk> writes
>I agree that AVR would be well worth a look. The price vs performance is
>very good and they are well supported with both free tools such as AVR
>Studio (from the Atmel web site) and WinAVR (GNU C) and 3rd party
>development tools (see avrfreaks.com).
However the GNU G is hardly optimised.
>
>Rog.
>(www.rwconcepts.co.uk)
>
>"Johnny" <john_wr@NOSPAM.hotmail.com.> wrote in message
>news:7parb0ddhdr60oeuo4h44p1luolpc4c740@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 12:09:53 +0800, Calvin Chan
>> <calvin_chan@post1.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Hi Folk
>> >
>> >I am currently looking for a micro with the following must features:
>> >
>> >24K+ flash programming memory
>> >hardware uart supporting 115200 baud
>> >hardware master i2c
>> >2 channels 10 bit A/D
>> > 512+ byte ram
>> >operating voltage 2.7V - 5V
>> >1 PWM
>> >speed of 10MIPs+
>> >
>> >8051 core, eeprom on chip are bonuses
>> >
>> >I know there are quite a few out there, eg. microchip pic18lc252,
>> >texas instrument - MSP430F156, F157, etc. Of course, I am looking for
>> >comparatively low cost in huge volume.
>> >
>> >
>> >Any recommendation?
>> >
>> >Thanks
>> >
>> >Calvin
>> >
>> >calvin_chan@post1.com
>>
>> I would recommend an Atmel AVR. I think they offer better performance
>> and value that the PIC 18 series. Not sure about MSP430 and 8051
>> derivatives.
>>
>> The PIC18 series needs two clock cylcles per instruction whereas the
>> AVR only needs one due to piplelining. So the PIC needs double the
>> Xtal frequency, which can cause increased EM radiation. Many 8051
>> based micros have the same issue or worse, but a few of them are fast.
>>
>> If using C language, I think the AVR is also more efficient than the
>> 8051 and PICs due to better addressing modes. I use and recommend the
>> Imagecraft C compiler for AVR.
>>
>> I don't have any experience with MSP430, but I believe it has similar
>> abilities to the AVR since it handles double the data width at roughly
>> half the MIPS.
>>
>> regards,
>> Johnny.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/\
/\/\/ chris@phaedsys.org www.phaedsys.org \/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Reply by Roger●June 4, 20042004-06-04
I agree that AVR would be well worth a look. The price vs performance is
very good and they are well supported with both free tools such as AVR
Studio (from the Atmel web site) and WinAVR (GNU C) and 3rd party
development tools (see avrfreaks.com).
Rog.
(www.rwconcepts.co.uk)
"Johnny" <john_wr@NOSPAM.hotmail.com.> wrote in message
news:7parb0ddhdr60oeuo4h44p1luolpc4c740@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 12:09:53 +0800, Calvin Chan
> <calvin_chan@post1.com> wrote:
>
> >Hi Folk
> >
> >I am currently looking for a micro with the following must features:
> >
> >24K+ flash programming memory
> >hardware uart supporting 115200 baud
> >hardware master i2c
> >2 channels 10 bit A/D
> > 512+ byte ram
> >operating voltage 2.7V - 5V
> >1 PWM
> >speed of 10MIPs+
> >
> >8051 core, eeprom on chip are bonuses
> >
> >I know there are quite a few out there, eg. microchip pic18lc252,
> >texas instrument - MSP430F156, F157, etc. Of course, I am looking for
> >comparatively low cost in huge volume.
> >
> >
> >Any recommendation?
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >Calvin
> >
> >calvin_chan@post1.com
>
> I would recommend an Atmel AVR. I think they offer better performance
> and value that the PIC 18 series. Not sure about MSP430 and 8051
> derivatives.
>
> The PIC18 series needs two clock cylcles per instruction whereas the
> AVR only needs one due to piplelining. So the PIC needs double the
> Xtal frequency, which can cause increased EM radiation. Many 8051
> based micros have the same issue or worse, but a few of them are fast.
>
> If using C language, I think the AVR is also more efficient than the
> 8051 and PICs due to better addressing modes. I use and recommend the
> Imagecraft C compiler for AVR.
>
> I don't have any experience with MSP430, but I believe it has similar
> abilities to the AVR since it handles double the data width at roughly
> half the MIPS.
>
> regards,
> Johnny.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Reply by Johnny●June 2, 20042004-06-02
On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 12:09:53 +0800, Calvin Chan
<calvin_chan@post1.com> wrote:
>Hi Folk
>
>I am currently looking for a micro with the following must features:
>
>24K+ flash programming memory
>hardware uart supporting 115200 baud
>hardware master i2c
>2 channels 10 bit A/D
> 512+ byte ram
>operating voltage 2.7V - 5V
>1 PWM
>speed of 10MIPs+
>
>8051 core, eeprom on chip are bonuses
>
>I know there are quite a few out there, eg. microchip pic18lc252,
>texas instrument - MSP430F156, F157, etc. Of course, I am looking for
>comparatively low cost in huge volume.
>
>
>Any recommendation?
>
>Thanks
>
>Calvin
>
>calvin_chan@post1.com
I would recommend an Atmel AVR. I think they offer better performance
and value that the PIC 18 series. Not sure about MSP430 and 8051
derivatives.
The PIC18 series needs two clock cylcles per instruction whereas the
AVR only needs one due to piplelining. So the PIC needs double the
Xtal frequency, which can cause increased EM radiation. Many 8051
based micros have the same issue or worse, but a few of them are fast.
If using C language, I think the AVR is also more efficient than the
8051 and PICs due to better addressing modes. I use and recommend the
Imagecraft C compiler for AVR.
I don't have any experience with MSP430, but I believe it has similar
abilities to the AVR since it handles double the data width at roughly
half the MIPS.
regards,
Johnny.
Reply by Neil Kurzman●June 2, 20042004-06-02
Calvin Chan wrote:
> Hi Folk
>
> I am currently looking for a micro with the following must features:
>
> 24K+ flash programming memory
> hardware uart supporting 115200 baud
> hardware master i2c
> 2 channels 10 bit A/D
> 512+ byte ram
> operating voltage 2.7V - 5V
> 1 PWM
> speed of 10MIPs+
>
> 8051 core, eeprom on chip are bonuses
>
> I know there are quite a few out there, eg. microchip pic18lc252,
> texas instrument - MSP430F156, F157, etc. Of course, I am looking for
> comparatively low cost in huge volume.
>
> Any recommendation?
>
> Thanks
>
> Calvin
>
> calvin_chan@post1.com
Look on ww.Keil.com they have a 8051 core search tool
Reply by Ulf Samuelsson●June 1, 20042004-06-01
"Calvin Chan" <calvin_chan@post1.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:dpvnb0djh27g8l037v460oo9o525vbvl5v@4ax.com...
> Hi Folk
>
> I am currently looking for a micro with the following must features:
>
> 24K+ flash programming memory
> hardware uart supporting 115200 baud
> hardware master i2c
> 2 channels 10 bit A/D
> 512+ byte ram
> operating voltage 2.7V - 5V
> 1 PWM
> speed of 10MIPs+
>
> 8051 core, eeprom on chip are bonuses
>
> I know there are quite a few out there, eg. microchip pic18lc252,
> texas instrument - MSP430F156, F157, etc. Of course, I am looking for
> comparatively low cost in huge volume.
>
ATmega32 (or if you fit inside 16kB, The pincompatible ATmega16)
> 24K+ flash programming memory OK 32 or 16 kB
> hardware uart supporting 115200 baud OK
> hardware master i2c OK
> 2 channels 10 bit A/D OK
> 512+ byte ram OK 2kB or
1 kB
> operating voltage 2.7V - 5V OK
> 1 PWM OK
> speed of 10MIPs+ OK in 5 Volt.
>
> 8051 core, eeprom on chip are bonuses AVR goves higher bonus
points, EEPROM
--
Best Regards
Ulf at atmel dot com
These comments are intended to be my own opinion and they
may, or may not be shared by my employer, Atmel Sweden.
Reply by Paul Carpenter●June 1, 20042004-06-01
On Tuesday, in article <40BC3D4F.9040706@wanadoo.fr>
habib.bouaziz-viallet@wanadoo.fr "habib bouaziz-viallet"
wrote:
>Calvin Chan wrote:
>> Hi Folk
>>
>> I am currently looking for a micro with the following must features:
>>
>> 24K+ flash programming memory
>> hardware uart supporting 115200 baud
>> hardware master i2c
>> 2 channels 10 bit A/D
>> 512+ byte ram
>> operating voltage 2.7V - 5V
>> 1 PWM
>> speed of 10MIPs+
>>
>> 8051 core, eeprom on chip are bonuses
>>
>> I know there are quite a few out there, eg. microchip pic18lc252,
>> texas instrument - MSP430F156, F157, etc. Of course, I am looking for
>> comparatively low cost in huge volume.
>>
>
>Take a look at renesas H8/300 (H8/3068 or 3069) or H8S (H82674) micros.
>GCC/NewLib, GNU Tools and many OSes (H8/OS ...etc) support it for years.
Possibly better match would be H8/Tiny Range H8/3664N
32KB Flash
2KB RAM
Uart
I2C master/slave
8ch 10bit A/D
512byte EEPROM
3 timers (one can be used as timebase)
1 watchdog
Address break H/W function for easier debugging
--
Paul Carpenter | paul@pcserv.demon.co.uk
<http://www.pcserv.demon.co.uk/> Main Site
<http://www.gnuh8.org.uk/> GNU H8 & mailing list info.
<http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate.
Reply by habib bouaziz-viallet●June 1, 20042004-06-01
Calvin Chan wrote:
> Hi Folk
>
> I am currently looking for a micro with the following must features:
>
> 24K+ flash programming memory
> hardware uart supporting 115200 baud
> hardware master i2c
> 2 channels 10 bit A/D
> 512+ byte ram
> operating voltage 2.7V - 5V
> 1 PWM
> speed of 10MIPs+
>
> 8051 core, eeprom on chip are bonuses
>
> I know there are quite a few out there, eg. microchip pic18lc252,
> texas instrument - MSP430F156, F157, etc. Of course, I am looking for
> comparatively low cost in huge volume.
>
>
> Any recommendation?
>
> Thanks
>
> Calvin
>
> calvin_chan@post1.com
Take a look at renesas H8/300 (H8/3068 or 3069) or H8S (H82674) micros.
GCC/NewLib, GNU Tools and many OSes (H8/OS ...etc) support it for years.
Cheers
Reply by Jim Granville●June 1, 20042004-06-01
Calvin Chan wrote:
> Hi Folk
>
> I am currently looking for a micro with the following must features:
>
> 24K+ flash programming memory
> hardware uart supporting 115200 baud
> hardware master i2c
> 2 channels 10 bit A/D
> 512+ byte ram
> operating voltage 2.7V - 5V
> 1 PWM
> speed of 10MIPs+
>
> 8051 core, eeprom on chip are bonuses
>
> I know there are quite a few out there, eg. microchip pic18lc252,
> texas instrument - MSP430F156, F157, etc. Of course, I am looking for
> comparatively low cost in huge volume.
'huge volumes' may need to be qualified with an actual number,
and you do not mention pin-count.
All uC are cheap in huge volumes :)
Look at :
Cygnal C8051F, Philips LPC9xx, maybe Infineon SABC868,
AT89C51ACx, CC0x, and Gencore have FLASH+ADC comming.
-jg