rickman wrote:

> I don't remember much about the Dragonball, but I seem to recall that
> it was several different processors.  Some of them were ARM7 devices.
> If so, the clock speed would give you a good idea of the CPU speed not
> including memory speed.  I think this is a part that uses external
> DRAM and Flash, no?

I was using the 68vz328, which is a 68k derivative, but there's no real 
alternative from Freescale and am quite annoyed that they end of life'd 
the whole 68k Dragonvball series in such a short space of time. 
Suddenly, the whole range is no longer manufactured and guess this is 
the result of the sale of the semi division.There is a Coldfire device 
with an on chip lcd controller, but it's in a tiny 256 ball bga and is 
also very expensive compared to the Dragonball. Arm is low cost, seems 
to be ubiquitous and heavily second sourced, so I guess it will be the 
way to go for the future.

> The LPC22xx parts are all ARM7 as are the SAM7 parts.  I am not so
> familiar with the ST parts, but I think the STR7 parts are all ARM7 as
> well.  So the clock speed combined with the wait states for memory
> should be a good indicator of relative performance.

Unfortunately, it's not that easy. Clock speed isn't really a good 
indicator, because it depends on architecture, instruction format, 
cycles per instruction, instruction mix for the application etc. Looked 
at the embedded benchmark org website, but there's not much there on arm 
at all. Overall, the rule for arm7 seems to be mips = 0.9 x clock speed, 
which would suggest far more throughput, but it's such a different 
architecture, it's hard to get a fix on actual performance. The only 
real way will be to get an eval kit and run some code on it.

> 
> There is a collection of info on many ARM7 parts at www.gnuarm.com.
> Go to the Resources page and scroll down to ARM Device Comparison
> Chart.  I need to fix a few errors/typos, but it is pretty complete at
> the moment.  I need to add some of the newer LPC and SAM parts as
> well.
> 

A really good site, thanks. The lpc parts in particular seem very 
capable and low cost. Can also recommend the Keil Arm arch primer, to 
help get up to speed. Very usefull summary.

Would like to use Solaris on Sparc for development, but memories of fun 
and games building 68k cross gcc etc to run under another unix variant 
suggests that it may not be straightforward. All part of the rich 
tapestry however...

Chris

On Feb 9, 11:40 am, "okalex" <oka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 8, 3:19 pm, "rickman" <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I recommend that you stick with the Atmel or NXP parts.
>
> > The AT91RM parts are fairly old.  Atmel has a new AT91SAM9260 part
> > which is listed as "production" and shows stock at Digikey.  They also
> > have the eval board for $560.  I can't say why this board is so
> > expensive.  It may have a lot on it, I don't know.
>
> > I don't know exactly why the NXP parts seem to be more popular with
> > smaller designers, but the Atmel parts are very good.  We are using
> > one of the SAM7S parts here and another project is using the SAM7X.
> > No real issues that made trouble for us.  I expect the SAM9 will be
> > pretty good as well.  Check out the Yahoo group, AT91SAM might be a
> > good place to ask questions.
>
> >http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/AT91SAM/
>
> Thanks for the advice.  The only NXP devices that fit our requirements
> (must have I2C and SDRAM controller, Ethernet MAC is a bonus) are the
> LPC8880 and LPC2468.  However, the LPC8880 is BGA-only, which we'd
> like to avoid, and the LPC2468 doesn't seem to be in full production
> yet and if it is, I'm hesitant to use a brand-new chip considering
> NXP's record for releasing buggy devices.
>
> That leaves us with Atmel, and the AT91SAM9260 is the closest fit for
> this project.  I think we may be able to deal with the expensive
> development kit.  Will we need to buy a JTAG debugger as well, or does
> the AT91SAM9260-EK come with an on-board debugger?

I don't know.  The AT91SAM7 kits I have seen use a separate debugger
device, but that is about $100 IIRC.

On Feb 8, 3:19 pm, "rickman" <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I recommend that you stick with the Atmel or NXP parts.
>
> The AT91RM parts are fairly old.  Atmel has a new AT91SAM9260 part
> which is listed as "production" and shows stock at Digikey.  They also
> have the eval board for $560.  I can't say why this board is so
> expensive.  It may have a lot on it, I don't know.
>
> I don't know exactly why the NXP parts seem to be more popular with
> smaller designers, but the Atmel parts are very good.  We are using
> one of the SAM7S parts here and another project is using the SAM7X.
> No real issues that made trouble for us.  I expect the SAM9 will be
> pretty good as well.  Check out the Yahoo group, AT91SAM might be a
> good place to ask questions.
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/AT91SAM/

Thanks for the advice.  The only NXP devices that fit our requirements
(must have I2C and SDRAM controller, Ethernet MAC is a bonus) are the
LPC8880 and LPC2468.  However, the LPC8880 is BGA-only, which we'd
like to avoid, and the LPC2468 doesn't seem to be in full production
yet and if it is, I'm hesitant to use a brand-new chip considering
NXP's record for releasing buggy devices.

That leaves us with Atmel, and the AT91SAM9260 is the closest fit for
this project.  I think we may be able to deal with the expensive
development kit.  Will we need to buy a JTAG debugger as well, or does
the AT91SAM9260-EK come with an on-board debugger?

Alex

On Feb 9, 4:42 am, ChrisQuayle <nos...@devnul.co.uk> wrote:
> rickman wrote:
>
> > I recommend that you stick with the Atmel or NXP parts.
>
> > The AT91RM parts are fairly old.  Atmel has a new AT91SAM9260 part
> > which is listed as "production" and shows stock at Digikey.  They also
> > have the eval board for $560.  I can't say why this board is so
> > expensive.  It may have a lot on it, I don't know.
>
> > I don't know exactly why the NXP parts seem to be more popular with
> > smaller designers, but the Atmel parts are very good.  We are using
> > one of the SAM7S parts here and another project is using the SAM7X.
> > No real issues that made trouble for us.  I expect the SAM9 will be
> > pretty good as well.  Check out the Yahoo group, AT91SAM might be a
> > good place to ask questions.
>
> >http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/AT91SAM/
>
> Have also been doing a survey of arm 7 devices recently, to replace a
> Dragonball device which has gone end of life. Initially started looking
> at Coldfire, but most of them seem to be bga only, which I really don't
> want to deal with at all. Also wanted an on chip lcd controller, but
> only a few of the Japanese arm devices include this and again don't want
> to buy far east because of concerns (real or imagined) over long term
> commitment to supply. At the mo, it's narrowed down to Philips / NXP,
> Atmel or ST microelectronics, with an Epson off chip lcd controller. Of
> the 3, ST have the most on chip flash and ram and seem to have the best
> support, including complete device driver libraries (even usb) which are
> free to download. For hardware, Embesthttp://www.embedinfo.com, have
> the widest range and look like the best value in terms of evaluation
> boards and ide based gnu toolkit.
>
> What I would like to find out is how the performance of the arm 7
> devices, eg: lpc2210 compare to Dragonball VZ328 in terms of throughput.
> Are they much more powerfull, about the same or what ?. Can find no
> figures on the web for arm, in old fashioned mips style ratings...

I don't remember much about the Dragonball, but I seem to recall that
it was several different processors.  Some of them were ARM7 devices.
If so, the clock speed would give you a good idea of the CPU speed not
including memory speed.  I think this is a part that uses external
DRAM and Flash, no?

The LPC22xx parts are all ARM7 as are the SAM7 parts.  I am not so
familiar with the ST parts, but I think the STR7 parts are all ARM7 as
well.  So the clock speed combined with the wait states for memory
should be a good indicator of relative performance.

There is a collection of info on many ARM7 parts at www.gnuarm.com.
Go to the Resources page and scroll down to ARM Device Comparison
Chart.  I need to fix a few errors/typos, but it is pretty complete at
the moment.  I need to add some of the newer LPC and SAM parts as
well.

rickman wrote:
> 
> I recommend that you stick with the Atmel or NXP parts.
> 
> The AT91RM parts are fairly old.  Atmel has a new AT91SAM9260 part
> which is listed as "production" and shows stock at Digikey.  They also
> have the eval board for $560.  I can't say why this board is so
> expensive.  It may have a lot on it, I don't know.
> 
> I don't know exactly why the NXP parts seem to be more popular with
> smaller designers, but the Atmel parts are very good.  We are using
> one of the SAM7S parts here and another project is using the SAM7X.
> No real issues that made trouble for us.  I expect the SAM9 will be
> pretty good as well.  Check out the Yahoo group, AT91SAM might be a
> good place to ask questions.
> 
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/AT91SAM/
> 
> 

Have also been doing a survey of arm 7 devices recently, to replace a 
Dragonball device which has gone end of life. Initially started looking 
at Coldfire, but most of them seem to be bga only, which I really don't 
want to deal with at all. Also wanted an on chip lcd controller, but 
only a few of the Japanese arm devices include this and again don't want 
to buy far east because of concerns (real or imagined) over long term 
commitment to supply. At the mo, it's narrowed down to Philips / NXP, 
Atmel or ST microelectronics, with an Epson off chip lcd controller. Of 
the 3, ST have the most on chip flash and ram and seem to have the best 
support, including complete device driver libraries (even usb) which are 
free to download. For hardware, Embest http://www.embedinfo.com, have 
the widest range and look like the best value in terms of evaluation 
boards and ide based gnu toolkit.

What I would like to find out is how the performance of the arm 7 
devices, eg: lpc2210 compare to Dragonball VZ328 in terms of throughput. 
Are they much more powerfull, about the same or what ?. Can find no 
figures on the web for arm, in old fashioned mips style ratings...

Chris

"okalex" <okalex@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1170961376.770173.115000@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 8, 8:38 am, "Tom Lucas"
> <news@REMOVE_auto_THIS_flame_TO_REPLY.clara.co.uk> wrote:
>> > Of course, if you want to use the GNU ARM tools, you don't have to 
>> > buy
>> > them anywhere.  You can download them free atwww.gnuarm.com
>>
>> This is true but the small outlay for Rowley's IDE is definitely 
>> worth
>> it. Of course, "worth" is all relative to the available budget. Also 
>> I'm
>> pretty sure it is cheaper than 1/3 of the cost of the other two.
>
> To be worth it, it would need to save me about a week of development
> time (I'm young and just started freelancing, so I don't charge very
> much) over the life of a six-month project, as opposed to using the
> free version of the tools combined with Eclipse.  In what ways could
> the Rowley development tools save me time?  I imagine imagine most of
> the time is saved by having a support system available if I ever have
> any problems and by reducing the amount of time required to set the
> tools up, correct?

The support is absolutely first-class which is a good time-saver. It all 
depends how familiar you are with the free environments. The Rowley kit 
works straight out of the box and has lots of example projects to get 
you up and running. Give them a call and they'll happily talk you 
through the options and benefits - they are a friendly bunch.

> It was brought to my attention that the microcontroller I use will
> need an SDRAM controller, since 4MB of SRAM is expensive (compared to
> $1 for SDRAM, at least).  I've narrowed my search down to a few
> microcontrollers, and I'd love it if I could get some feedback from
> the anyone and everyone regarding the merits and pitfalls of these
> processors.
>
> Leading the pack, is the Sharp LH79525.  This has everything we need,
> is fairly inexpensive, and seems to have a decent amount of online
> support.  However, I've seen a few random postings on the internet
> stating that Sharp is discontinuing the BlueStreak line (for instance,
> http://www.revely.com/).  Is the 79525 a member of the BlueStreak
> family, and, if so, is there any truth to these rumors?  It seems like
> a fairly new chip, so I'd be amazed if they're end-of-lifing it
> already.

The 79525 certainly is BlueStreak and Sharp is discontinuing all its 
microcontrollers at the end of next month so don't design it into 
anything new. Good processor as well - it's a pity to lose it. I've just 
spent a year designing a system around an LH79524 and I expect I will 
probably go to xscale to replace it. I use Logic PD's rather excellent 
card engines in my design so the xscale one should be almost a drop in 
replacement (and it will already be supported by the Rowley tools) but 
then there is the worry of how long Marvel will keep the line alive :-(

<snip>
If I was going to be designing in a new ARM7 part then I would probably 
go for one of the NXP LPC microcontrollers because they have a good 
range and are likely to still be around in five years. 

On Feb 8, 2:02 pm, "okalex" <oka...@gmail.com> wrote:
...snip...
> The Atmel AT91RM9260 seems like a good part which fits our
> specifications.  It would probably be overkill for our application,
> but at $11 a piece (in quantities of 100), that's perfectly fine.
> Like the MCF5270, however, I haven't been able to find an inexpensive
> development board.  The only one I've found is the evaluation kit
> manufactured by Atmel, which costs nearly $700.
>
> Lastly, we've got the NXP LPC2468...sort of.  As far as I can tell,
> this part is only just being released.  None of the major distributors
> have them in stock, so I'm assuming that it's still sampling and
> hasn't been put into full production yet.  I could develop on a
> LPC2378, but my main concern is relying on a brand-new chip.  I've
> read the NXP has a reputation for their Rev. 0 silicon being extremely
> buggy (for example, the LPC2378 cannot write to it's external bus).
>
> Thoughts or comments on any of the above microcontrollers would be
> greatly appreciated, and will likely be handsomely rewarded in the
> afterlife, your next life, or through good karma (depending on your
> beliefs).

I recommend that you stick with the Atmel or NXP parts.

The AT91RM parts are fairly old.  Atmel has a new AT91SAM9260 part
which is listed as "production" and shows stock at Digikey.  They also
have the eval board for $560.  I can't say why this board is so
expensive.  It may have a lot on it, I don't know.

I don't know exactly why the NXP parts seem to be more popular with
smaller designers, but the Atmel parts are very good.  We are using
one of the SAM7S parts here and another project is using the SAM7X.
No real issues that made trouble for us.  I expect the SAM9 will be
pretty good as well.  Check out the Yahoo group, AT91SAM might be a
good place to ask questions.

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/AT91SAM/

On Feb 8, 8:38 am, "Tom Lucas"
<news@REMOVE_auto_THIS_flame_TO_REPLY.clara.co.uk> wrote:
> > Of course, if you want to use the GNU ARM tools, you don't have to buy
> > them anywhere.  You can download them free atwww.gnuarm.com
>
> This is true but the small outlay for Rowley's IDE is definitely worth
> it. Of course, "worth" is all relative to the available budget. Also I'm
> pretty sure it is cheaper than 1/3 of the cost of the other two.

To be worth it, it would need to save me about a week of development
time (I'm young and just started freelancing, so I don't charge very
much) over the life of a six-month project, as opposed to using the
free version of the tools combined with Eclipse.  In what ways could
the Rowley development tools save me time?  I imagine imagine most of
the time is saved by having a support system available if I ever have
any problems and by reducing the amount of time required to set the
tools up, correct?

It was brought to my attention that the microcontroller I use will
need an SDRAM controller, since 4MB of SRAM is expensive (compared to
$1 for SDRAM, at least).  I've narrowed my search down to a few
microcontrollers, and I'd love it if I could get some feedback from
the anyone and everyone regarding the merits and pitfalls of these
processors.

Leading the pack, is the Sharp LH79525.  This has everything we need,
is fairly inexpensive, and seems to have a decent amount of online
support.  However, I've seen a few random postings on the internet
stating that Sharp is discontinuing the BlueStreak line (for instance,
http://www.revely.com/).  Is the 79525 a member of the BlueStreak
family, and, if so, is there any truth to these rumors?  It seems like
a fairly new chip, so I'd be amazed if they're end-of-lifing it
already.

Next up, we've got the OKI ML674001 and 675001.  This chip seems
pretty good, and the price is great, but I've read that OKI's support
for smaller manufacturers is pretty terrible.  Also, I couldn't find
much of an online community for this chip, so I'm a bit concerned that
I'll spend a lot of time troubleshooting problems.

The Freescale MCF5270 would be a suitable controller, as well.  The
only real problem is that I haven't been able to find a low-cost ($300
or less) development board for it.  I know that NetBurner makes
inexpensive boards for them, but they seem to want you to use they're
bundled software, but you have to either use their modules which my
employer doesn't want to do for various reasons, or purchase a site
license, which is out of our price range.  Has anyone had success
using their development board for non-NetBurner-based projects?  If
so, what tools did you use for debugging?  The NetBurner engineer I
wrote to said that they don't have a BDM header on board.

The Freescale MCF5208 would also work well, but I haven't been able to
find a distributor who has the QFP version in stock.  All I could find
was a small number of BGA devices at Digikey.  I don't want to go
through with the design only to find out later that the QFP is
unavailable.  Anyone know of a source for these chips?

Similarly, the Samsung S3C4510 would work well, but again, I haven't
been able to find a vendor who has them in stock.  I haven't even
found a vendor who has them in their database, so I don't know how
much they cost, if I could get a hold of them.

The Atmel AT91RM9260 seems like a good part which fits our
specifications.  It would probably be overkill for our application,
but at $11 a piece (in quantities of 100), that's perfectly fine.
Like the MCF5270, however, I haven't been able to find an inexpensive
development board.  The only one I've found is the evaluation kit
manufactured by Atmel, which costs nearly $700.

Lastly, we've got the NXP LPC2468...sort of.  As far as I can tell,
this part is only just being released.  None of the major distributors
have them in stock, so I'm assuming that it's still sampling and
hasn't been put into full production yet.  I could develop on a
LPC2378, but my main concern is relying on a brand-new chip.  I've
read the NXP has a reputation for their Rev. 0 silicon being extremely
buggy (for example, the LPC2378 cannot write to it's external bus).

Thoughts or comments on any of the above microcontrollers would be
greatly appreciated, and will likely be handsomely rewarded in the
afterlife, your next life, or through good karma (depending on your
beliefs).

Cheers,
Alex

"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1170940148.996630.97160@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 8, 5:15 am, "Tom Lucas"
> <news@REMOVE_auto_THIS_flame_TO_REPLY.clara.co.uk> wrote:
>> "Gene S. Berkowitz" <first.l...@comcast.net> wrote in 
>> messagenews:MPG.203478efb733fe0a989821@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>>
>> > In article <1170878535.599185.5...@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
>> > oka...@gmail.com says...
>>
>> > I use Rowley CrossWorks for ARM, along with the Rowley CrossConnect
>> > JTAG
>> > adapter.  It is a custom IDE and debugger around the GCC compiler, 
>> > and
>> > I
>> > have found it excellent in all respects, and Rowley support very
>> > responsive.  It is also approximately 1/3 the cost of the IAR or 
>> > Keil
>> > tools.
>>
>> >http://www.rowley.co.uk/arm/index.htm
>>
>> Seconded.
>
> Of course, if you want to use the GNU ARM tools, you don't have to buy
> them anywhere.  You can download them free at www.gnuarm.com

This is true but the small outlay for Rowley's IDE is definitely worth 
it. Of course, "worth" is all relative to the available budget. Also I'm 
pretty sure it is cheaper than 1/3 of the cost of the other two. 

On Feb 8, 5:15 am, "Tom Lucas"
<news@REMOVE_auto_THIS_flame_TO_REPLY.clara.co.uk> wrote:
> "Gene S. Berkowitz" <first.l...@comcast.net> wrote in messagenews:MPG.203478efb733fe0a989821@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>
> > In article <1170878535.599185.5...@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> > oka...@gmail.com says...
>
> > I use Rowley CrossWorks for ARM, along with the Rowley CrossConnect
> > JTAG
> > adapter.  It is a custom IDE and debugger around the GCC compiler, and
> > I
> > have found it excellent in all respects, and Rowley support very
> > responsive.  It is also approximately 1/3 the cost of the IAR or Keil
> > tools.
>
> >http://www.rowley.co.uk/arm/index.htm
>
> Seconded.

Of course, if you want to use the GNU ARM tools, you don't have to buy
them anywhere.  You can download them free at www.gnuarm.com