TI MSP430

On 2006-04-08, larwe <zwsdotcom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Jim Granville wrote:
>
>> On the MAXQ, watch out for the high Core-On Icc, eg one spec's
>
> Interesting. I never looked closely at this part because frankly we've
> got enough devices in our stable and don't want to start learning a new
> one... :)
>
>> > The MSP430 prices are annoying, though. AVRs come down to
>> > as little as 1/4th the price of an equivalent TI part.
>> 
>> In what volumes ?
>
> 30~50K annually.

You must get a better deal on AVR parts than I could.  I was
comparing MSP430 and ATmega parts last month, and the ATmega
parts were consistently higher priced in the 1K-5K volumes.

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  I feel like a wet
                                  at               parking meter on Darvon!
                               visi.com            

Grant Edwards wrote:

> >> > The MSP430 prices are annoying, though. AVRs come down to
> >> > as little as 1/4th the price of an equivalent TI part.
> >>
> >> In what volumes ?
> >
> > 30~50K annually.
>
> You must get a better deal on AVR parts than I could.  I was

I can buy an ATmega32L cheaper than an MSP430F1122...

In article <1144533945.544698.172170@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, 
zwsdotcom@gmail.com says...
> 
> Jim Granville wrote:
> 
> > On the MAXQ, watch out for the high Core-On Icc, eg one spec's
> 
> Interesting. I never looked closely at this part because frankly we've
> got enough devices in our stable and don't want to start learning a new
> one... :)
> 
> > > The MSP430 prices are annoying, though. AVRs come down to
> > > as little as 1/4th the price of an equivalent TI part.
> > 
> > In what volumes ?
> 
> 30~50K annually.
> 
> 
That quantity factor makes a big difference.   My customer had no 
problem with a waaaaay over-specified MSP430F149 as a combo RTC
and I/O controller  at quantities of a hundred per year.  For that
particular scientific instrument,   the value added is in the 
software and sensor circuitry.  A few dollars here and there 
to make the engineers comfortable  is no problem when you're
selling a few hundred instruments at $3000+ per unit.   Engineering
for products above 10,000 units per year  really does require
a different approach to component selection.    I think I'll stay
in the low-volume, high value-added arena where I don't have to
count the bytes and pennies quite so carefully!   ;-)

Mark Borgerson

Mark Borgerson wrote:

> That quantity factor makes a big difference.   My customer had no
> problem with a waaaaay over-specified MSP430F149 as a combo RTC
> and I/O controller  at quantities of a hundred per year.  For that

You didn't provide the punchline - did he look at AVR and compare
prices at all?

MSP430 is a truly elegant architecture, there's no denying it. von
Neumann simplicity, totally transparent handling of registers and
addressing modes; I really can't find much to fault with it (except
maybe the way info memory is handled). But:

> software and sensor circuitry.  A few dollars here and there
> to make the engineers comfortable  is no problem when you're

How much "comfort" did the F149 earn you, out of interest? I've worked
a lot with AVR in my real life, and MSP430 mostly at work. While AVR is
not internally as tidy as MSP430, it's really not bad (especially
compared with a horror story like the PICmicro). And both parts are
quite C-friendly, if this tickles your pickle.

> a different approach to component selection.    I think I'll stay
> in the low-volume, high value-added arena where I don't have to
> count the bytes and pennies quite so carefully!   ;-)

The dollars add up pretty quickly. I can't even make a decision that's
worth less than $250K these days. (These numbers are frightening, by
the way).

larwe wrote:
> MSP430 is a truly elegant architecture, there's no denying it. von
> Neumann simplicity, totally transparent handling of registers and
> addressing modes; I really can't find much to fault with it (except
> maybe the way info memory is handled). But:

Of course, the architecture is a simplified version of the TMS9900 CPU, 
which was derived from the TI 990 minicomputer, which was in turn a 
rip-off of the PDP-11 ISA, with slight changes (fewer addressing modes, 
allowing twice as many registers) to avoid patent issues...

Marc

On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 00:16:04 GMT, Marc Ramsey <marc@ranlog.comREMOVE>
wrote:

>larwe wrote:
>> MSP430 is a truly elegant architecture, there's no denying it. von
>> Neumann simplicity, totally transparent handling of registers and
>> addressing modes; I really can't find much to fault with it (except
>> maybe the way info memory is handled). But:
>
>Of course, the architecture is a simplified version of the TMS9900 CPU, 
>which was derived from the TI 990 minicomputer, which was in turn a 
>rip-off of the PDP-11 ISA, with slight changes (fewer addressing modes, 
>allowing twice as many registers) to avoid patent issues...

I have a few comments about a pdp-11 comparison at:

  http://users.easystreet.com/jkirwan/new/msp430.html

Jon

Marc Ramsey wrote:

> > MSP430 is a truly elegant architecture, there's no denying it. von
>
> Of course, the architecture is a simplified version of the TMS9900 CPU,
> which was derived from the TI 990 minicomputer, which was in turn a
> rip-off of the PDP-11 ISA, with slight changes (fewer addressing modes,

LOL. You know, writing this most recent book is so amusing. I think I
could probably use 75% of it as responses in c.a.e.

"Now, it's an obscure but well-recognized ritual amongst engineers and
computer scientists to gauge the architecture of any new device on the
basis of its similarity to the PDP-11(1). The strongest term of
approbation you can use for a CPU design is to say "It's just like a
PDP-11!". Exactly why this is universally regarded as a Good Thing is
not exactly clear, but in any case, this epithet is frequently applied
to the MSP430. (I've always felt that this is the same sort of
statement as saying "My 2007 Mercedes convertible is just like a 1965
International Harvester Scout light truck. They both have pneumatic
tires and a removable roof!"). What I think these people probably
mean is that the MSP430 has a very nice orthogonal instruction set and
simple memory addressing scheme.


(1) - If I ever design a microprocessor, I am going to print a line
drawing of a complete PDP-11/20 front panel on the top of the package."

larwe wrote:

> Grant Edwards wrote:
> 
> 
>>>>>The MSP430 prices are annoying, though. AVRs come down to
>>>>>as little as 1/4th the price of an equivalent TI part.
>>>>
>>>>In what volumes ?
>>>
>>>30~50K annually.
>>
>>You must get a better deal on AVR parts than I could.  I was

That can happen, where one supplier is able to get better
"column movement" than another.
Plus lead free 'stock clearing' can also affect prices...



> I can buy an ATmega32L cheaper than an MSP430F1122...
> 

Just looking at Mouser prices, (which are low volume),

MSP430F1122IDW 	MSP430 Series SOIC-20 4kB Flash 256B RAM 10bit ADC
250: 	$ 3.000

ATMEGA32L-8MC	Atmel RISC Microcontrollers MLF-44 32k byte
100: 	$ 8.010

  	C8051F411-GM  Mixed Signal MLP28 50 MIPS,32KB,12ADC RTCLOCK,28 PIN,MCU
1: 	$ 3.670

-jg

Jim Granville wrote:
> That can happen, where one supplier is able to get better
> "column movement" than another.
> Plus lead free 'stock clearing' can also affect prices...

We buy direct in both cases, and we only spec in RoHS-compliant parts.

> Just looking at Mouser prices, (which are low volume),

Right. But these are distribution prices. They don't reflect the direct
pricing at all. Clearly TI's prices to distris are closer to the
break-even edge than Atmel's, so neither TI nor the distri have much
room to discount deeply on quantity.

On 2006-04-08, larwe <zwsdotcom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Grant Edwards wrote:
>
>> >> > The MSP430 prices are annoying, though. AVRs come down to
>> >> > as little as 1/4th the price of an equivalent TI part.
>> >>
>> >> In what volumes ?
>> >
>> > 30~50K annually.
>>
>> You must get a better deal on AVR parts than I could.  I was
>
> I can buy an ATmega32L cheaper than an MSP430F1122...

IIRC, I was comparing ATmega6450 and ATmega1280 with 430F148
and 149.

The AVR parts were quite a bit more expensive ($2-$3 more).

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  O.K.! Speak with a
                                  at               PHILADELPHIA ACCENT!! Send
                               visi.com            out for CHINESE FOOD!! Hop
                                                   a JET!