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
advice on choosing mcu
Started by ●June 1, 2004
Reply by ●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
Reply by ●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.comTake 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 ●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 ●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 or1 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 bonuspoints, 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 ●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.comLook on ww.Keil.com they have a 8051 core search tool
Reply by ●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.comI 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 ●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 ●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 ●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.
