Hi all,
We have done some testing on the power consumption of a RCM3100 module with
the R3000 processor and the RCM3110 with the R3000A.
The test program runs at 32kHz divide by 16 and runs an endless loop reading
the clock (DC8.01) :
#asm
start:
copied_the_read_rtc_code_here_to_avoid_using_a_call_instruction_which_accesses_memory
jr start
#endasm
Running this on both modules gives a current consumption of 100A on the
RCM3100 and 330A(!) on the RCM3110. The latest posts on this subject
suggested
that the R3000A comsumes less. Also the RCM3110 has only one flash and less
RAM so it should comsume less then the RCM3100. Can someone explain this
?
Regards,
VR
Low-Power RCM3000 vs RCM3110
Started by ●May 13, 2005
Reply by ●May 13, 20052005-05-13
At this current levels you should make sure all the I/O ports are
properly set and terminated (pull-ups/downs on inputs).
In addition, I believe that reading the clock is not really the lowest
power loop you might use (unless you need it). Doing mulliplications
with zero is better. Anyway, judging from the differences between
the 3000 and 3000A you report (it should be the other way round),
and considering that you run the same software on both boards,
most likely you still have unterminated input ports (floating) on the
RCM3110.
Lix
--- In rabbit-semi@rabb..., vlaamsereus@t... wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We have done some testing on the power consumption of a RCM3100 module with
> the R3000 processor and the RCM3110 with the R3000A.
>
> The test program runs at 32kHz divide by 16 and runs an endless loop reading
> the clock (DC8.01) :
>
> #asm
>
> start: copied_the_read_rtc_code_here_to_avoid_using_a_call_instruction_which_accesses_memor
y
>
> jr start
>
> #endasm
>
> Running this on both modules gives a current consumption of 100A on the
> RCM3100 and 330A(!) on the RCM3110. The latest posts on this subject suggested
> that the R3000A comsumes less. Also the RCM3110 has only one flash and less
> RAM so it should comsume less then the RCM3100. Can someone explain this
> ?
>
> Regards,
> VR
Reply by ●May 18, 20052005-05-18
I do need the read_rtc loop, I only have outputs for the moment which are
set to high but not connected to anything.
I'm now looking into the 2 different RAM that are used. The RCM3100 has a
Cypress RAM, the RCM3110 has a different one which I can't find any documentation
of (IC62LV5128LL_55H). Maybe someone at Z-World can provide this ?
VR
>-- Original Message --
>To: rabbit-semi@rabb...
>From: "lixpaulian" <lix@lix@...>
>Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 12:11:56 -0000
>Subject: [rabbit-semi] Re: Low-Power RCM3000 vs RCM3110
>Reply-To: rabbit-semi@rabb... ><html><body ><tt>
><BR>
>At this current levels you should make sure all the I/O ports are<BR>
>properly set and terminated (pull-ups/downs on inputs).<BR>
><BR>
>In addition, I believe that reading the clock is not really the lowest<BR>
>power loop you might use (unless you need it). Doing mulliplications<BR>
>with zero is better. Anyway, judging from the differences between<BR>
>the 3000 and 3000A you report (it should be the other way round),<BR>
>and considering that you run the same software on both boards,<BR>
>most likely you still have unterminated input ports (floating) on the<BR>
>RCM3110.<BR>
><BR>
>Lix<BR>
><BR>
>--- In rabbit-semi@rabb..., vlaamsereus@t... wrote:<BR>
>> Hi all,<BR>
>> <BR>
>> We have done some testing on the power consumption of a RCM3100 module
>with<BR>
>> the R3000 processor and the RCM3110 with the R3000A.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> The test program runs at 32kHz divide by 16 and runs an endless loop
>reading<BR>
>> the clock (DC8.01) :<BR>
>> <BR>
>> #asm<BR>
>> <BR>
>> start:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> <BR>
>copied_the_read_rtc_code_here_to_avoid_using_a_call_instruction_which_accesses_memor<BR>
>y<BR>
>> <BR>
>> jr start<BR>
>> <BR>
>> #endasm<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Running this on both modules gives a current consumption of 100A on
>the<BR>
>> RCM3100 and 330A(!) on the RCM3110. The latest posts on this subject
>suggested<BR>
>> that the R3000A comsumes less. Also the RCM3110 has only one flash and
>less<BR>
>> RAM so it should comsume less then the RCM3100. Can someone explain
>this<BR>
>> ?<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Regards,<BR>
>> VR<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
></tt>
>
set to high but not connected to anything.
I'm now looking into the 2 different RAM that are used. The RCM3100 has a
Cypress RAM, the RCM3110 has a different one which I can't find any documentation
of (IC62LV5128LL_55H). Maybe someone at Z-World can provide this ?
VR
>-- Original Message --
>To: rabbit-semi@rabb...
>From: "lixpaulian" <lix@lix@...>
>Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 12:11:56 -0000
>Subject: [rabbit-semi] Re: Low-Power RCM3000 vs RCM3110
>Reply-To: rabbit-semi@rabb... ><html><body ><tt>
><BR>
>At this current levels you should make sure all the I/O ports are<BR>
>properly set and terminated (pull-ups/downs on inputs).<BR>
><BR>
>In addition, I believe that reading the clock is not really the lowest<BR>
>power loop you might use (unless you need it). Doing mulliplications<BR>
>with zero is better. Anyway, judging from the differences between<BR>
>the 3000 and 3000A you report (it should be the other way round),<BR>
>and considering that you run the same software on both boards,<BR>
>most likely you still have unterminated input ports (floating) on the<BR>
>RCM3110.<BR>
><BR>
>Lix<BR>
><BR>
>--- In rabbit-semi@rabb..., vlaamsereus@t... wrote:<BR>
>> Hi all,<BR>
>> <BR>
>> We have done some testing on the power consumption of a RCM3100 module
>with<BR>
>> the R3000 processor and the RCM3110 with the R3000A.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> The test program runs at 32kHz divide by 16 and runs an endless loop
>reading<BR>
>> the clock (DC8.01) :<BR>
>> <BR>
>> #asm<BR>
>> <BR>
>> start:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> <BR>
>copied_the_read_rtc_code_here_to_avoid_using_a_call_instruction_which_accesses_memor<BR>
>y<BR>
>> <BR>
>> jr start<BR>
>> <BR>
>> #endasm<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Running this on both modules gives a current consumption of 100A on
>the<BR>
>> RCM3100 and 330A(!) on the RCM3110. The latest posts on this subject
>suggested<BR>
>> that the R3000A comsumes less. Also the RCM3110 has only one flash and
>less<BR>
>> RAM so it should comsume less then the RCM3100. Can someone explain
>this<BR>
>> ?<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Regards,<BR>
>> VR<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
></tt>
>
