Re: PIC versus AVR
- From: "steve" <bungalow_steve@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 6 Aug 2006 21:44:54 -0700
Grant Edwards wrote:
Start at yet another end again: why pick an 8-bit architecture
if you're using a language or writing an application that needs
to do a lot of 16-bit operations? Something like an MSP430
(16-bit) or H8 (16/32 bit) is cheaper than an AVR, and makes
life easier. I particularly like the H8/300 which provides
atomic read/write of 32-bit variables (long integers and
floats): that eliminates the requirements for a lot of mutexes.
Well the H8/300's max out at 2K RAM (8K for AVR's) 60K FLASH (256K
AVR's), requires 50% more power, are physically bigger, have no
EEPROM, limited selection, there is a price to pay in die size when you
move up to a 16 bit processor which can make your life harder it other
aspects, I also seem to remember doing a H8/300 16 bit multiply was
slower then a AVR's 16 bit multiply and generally slower in all
instructions, so it's not so cut and dry as you imply if you dig into
the details. The MSP430's are not cheaper then the AVR's.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: PIC versus AVR
- From: Grant Edwards
- Re: PIC versus AVR
- From: Ulf Samuelsson
- Re: PIC versus AVR
- References:
- PIC versus AVR
- From: mc
- Re: PIC versus AVR
- From: David Kelly
- Re: PIC versus AVR
- From: larwe
- Re: PIC versus AVR
- From: FreeRTOS.org
- Re: PIC versus AVR
- From: Grant Edwards
- Re: PIC versus AVR
- From: Ulf Samuelsson
- Re: PIC versus AVR
- From: Grant Edwards
- PIC versus AVR
- Prev by Date: Re: Can you be a good programmer?
- Next by Date: Re: Microblaze, EDK, Spartan 3 and Webpack
- Previous by thread: Re: PIC versus AVR
- Next by thread: Re: PIC versus AVR
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
