Looking for an embedded processor

We currently use a MCF5272. We are discussing moving to a faster
processor. I did
a quick search among the various processors available and I have a few
observations.

         - Average ARM (Atmel) Processors seem to run at 40-50MHz. The
high end
           200-400Mhz were very expensive compared to 5275 ($10).

         - Power QUICC (400MHz) seems to be power hungry. 6W
consumption. 5275
           seems to consume 1mA per MHz = 200mA @ 200MHz * 2.0V
(approx) = 0.4W. There
           must be some problem with my calculation here since this
difference is too
           large. I could not find any numbers in the Coldfire
literature.

There does not seem to be a low power (<2W), low cost (<$20), good
performance (200MHz)
processor except 5275.

Your opinions please.

On 24 May 2006 18:15:15 -0700, "News" <news@redbandsystems.com> wrote
in comp.arch.embedded:

> We currently use a MCF5272. We are discussing moving to a faster
> processor. I did
> a quick search among the various processors available and I have a few
> observations.
> 
>          - Average ARM (Atmel) Processors seem to run at 40-50MHz. The

Above you are referring to typical ARM 7 parts.

> high end
>            200-400Mhz were very expensive compared to 5275 ($10).

Arm 9 runs to just about 200Mhz.  Look at Atmel's and Freescale's ARM
9 parts.  Above 200Mhz, you are talking about either XScale or ARM 11,
which might be more expensive.

>          - Power QUICC (400MHz) seems to be power hungry. 6W
> consumption. 5275
>            seems to consume 1mA per MHz = 200mA @ 200MHz * 2.0V
> (approx) = 0.4W. There
>            must be some problem with my calculation here since this
> difference is too
>            large. I could not find any numbers in the Coldfire
> literature.
> 
> There does not seem to be a low power (<2W), low cost (<$20), good
> performance (200MHz)
> processor except 5275.
> 
> Your opinions please.

I know we're paying quite a bit less for Atmel's AT91RM9200, and
running it at 180 MHz.  Of course, volume makes a difference, but
depending on the package, DigiKey has the least expensive part at
$16.65 in single quantities.

Atmel also has one or more newer ARM 9 parts, I'm not so familiar with
them, but they are probably worth checking out.

-- 
Jack Klein
Home: http://JK-Technology.Com
FAQs for
comp.lang.c http://c-faq.com/
comp.lang.c++ http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/
alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++
http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~ajo/docs/FAQ-acllc.html

News wrote:

> We currently use a MCF5272. We are discussing moving to a faster
> processor. I did
> a quick search among the various processors available and I have a few
> observations.
> 
>          - Average ARM (Atmel) Processors seem to run at 40-50MHz. The
> high end
>            200-400Mhz were very expensive compared to 5275 ($10).
> 
>          - Power QUICC (400MHz) seems to be power hungry. 6W
> consumption. 5275
>            seems to consume 1mA per MHz = 200mA @ 200MHz * 2.0V
> (approx) = 0.4W. There
>            must be some problem with my calculation here since this
> difference is too
>            large. I could not find any numbers in the Coldfire
> literature.
> 
> There does not seem to be a low power (<2W), low cost (<$20), good
> performance (200MHz)
> processor except 5275.

I did note that AnalogDevices now do a stacked die BlackFin

http://www.analog.com/en/press/0,2890,3%255F%255F101169,00.html

they claim 'starts at $13.75/10K', for devices with 500MHz core, with 
148KB RAM.

Of course, the flash will not run at 500Mhz, but this looked an 
impressive single package.

I think intel also do stacked die XScales ?

-jg

News wrote:
> We currently use a MCF5272. We are discussing moving to a faster
> processor. I did
> a quick search among the various processors available and I have a few
> observations.
> 
>          - Average ARM (Atmel) Processors seem to run at 40-50MHz. The
> high end
>            200-400Mhz were very expensive compared to 5275 ($10).
> 
>          - Power QUICC (400MHz) seems to be power hungry. 6W
> consumption. 5275
>            seems to consume 1mA per MHz = 200mA @ 200MHz * 2.0V
> (approx) = 0.4W. There
>            must be some problem with my calculation here since this
> difference is too
>            large. I could not find any numbers in the Coldfire
> literature.
> 
> There does not seem to be a low power (<2W), low cost (<$20), good
> performance (200MHz)
> processor except 5275.
> 
> Your opinions please.
> 

What about staying in the family and using a Coldfire 54xx device?

> There does not seem to be a low power (<2W), low cost (<$20), good
> performance (200MHz)
> processor except 5275.

There is - at Freescale. And it is just one, your observation holds
true
for the rest (unfortunately ....).
Have a look at the MPC5200 - PPC 603e core, DDRAM, PCI, 10/100
Ethernet, USB 1.1 host, several multipurpose serial channels,
about 1W at 400 MHz core clock. The cheapest they list
is at $17.something for >1000 pieces.

Dimiter

------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff               Transgalactic Instruments

http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------


News wrote:
> We currently use a MCF5272. We are discussing moving to a faster
> processor. I did
> a quick search among the various processors available and I have a few
> observations.
>
>          - Average ARM (Atmel) Processors seem to run at 40-50MHz. The
> high end
>            200-400Mhz were very expensive compared to 5275 ($10).
>
>          - Power QUICC (400MHz) seems to be power hungry. 6W
> consumption. 5275
>            seems to consume 1mA per MHz = 200mA @ 200MHz * 2.0V
> (approx) = 0.4W. There
>            must be some problem with my calculation here since this
> difference is too
>            large. I could not find any numbers in the Coldfire
> literature.
>
> There does not seem to be a low power (<2W), low cost (<$20), good
> performance (200MHz)
> processor except 5275.
> 
> Your opinions please.