bloody-orc said:omg Nigel! you have over 18k posts! Jesas...
As for the AVR vs PIC war... well I have seen more AVR chips in devices than i have seen PICs for some unknown reason. Maybe I don't know where to look...
Sceadwian said:That's why I so strongly suggest AVR's to Marks Nigel, because he has NO experience, and starting off the architecture of a simple AVR is simpler than the architecture of a PIC.
Sceadwain said:That's why I so strongly suggest AVR's to Marks Nigel, because he has NO experience, and starting off the architecture of a simple AVR is simpler than the architecture of a PIC.
Sceadwian said:The hardware is easier to learn, and the user base is compareable to PIC's.
A quick lookup shows that Intel's market share is about 82.5% and AMD's market share is about 15.7%. I don't know, why would you go with something you don't see very often? The only numbers I could find in reference to Atmel and Microchip were that Atmel has a 30% market share of 8 bit flash micro controllers. Though I'm not sure how much to trust that number because the micro chip market has a much more complex product line than do PC processors and support chips, it is a good indication that Atmel has a higher market share vs the rest of it's market than AMD does vs Intel. It appears obvious now that you're not actually researching the various chip lines you're intending on actually purchasing very throughly, which means you may want to postpone any purchases until you've narrowed things down to what's really right for you. I spent almost a year and a half on electronics forums and at least 6 months researching various hobbyist friendly micro controller lines and I picked AVR's because they won hand down in every category of usability usefulness and accessibility to anyone.Go with AMD. The shear speed and efficiency of AMD processors cancel the need for a large cache. My current desktop has a sempron 2800+ with only 256kb of cache, which is a world faster than my intel system with 512kb of cache. AMD is better. __________________
There is no "I" in "team", unless Apple makes it... Then it would be iTeam.
Sceadwian said:It's very simple Nigel, I didn't qualify the four to one clock difference in AVR/PIC instruction cycles which gives the AVR it's major I/O and processing advantage as an opinion nor the simplicity of it's register setup as an opinion, nor it's C oriented hardware optimizations as opinion because they aren't opinion's, they're bonfied differences in the way the hardware is constructed, they're differences not opinions. Look it up yourself.
A quick lookup shows that Intel's market share is about 82.5% and AMD's market share is about 15.7%. I don't know, why would you go with something you don't see very often? The only numbers I could find in reference to Atmel and Microchip were that Atmel has a 30% market share of 8 bit flash micro controllers. Though I'm not sure how much to trust that number because the micro chip market has a much more complex product line than do PC processors and support chips, it is a good indication that Atmel has a higher market share vs the rest of it's market than AMD does vs Intel. It appears obvious now that you're not actually researching the various chip lines you're intending on actually purchasing very throughly, which means you may want to postpone any purchases until you've narrowed things down to what's really right for you. I spent almost a year and a half on electronics forums and at least 6 months researching various hobbyist friendly micro controller lines and I picked AVR's because they won hand down in every category of usability usefulness and accessibility to anyone.
Marks256 said:I went AMD when Intel started sucking. I may start with PICs (as they are most popular, and i am sure there is A LOT of code out for them), but i will probably give AVRs a try. Yah, yah, i know there is quite a bit of code out for AVRs, but what does it matter to you what i start with? Who knows, maybe i will like AVR's better, and will be wasting my time with PIC's. That way, when/if i go with AVR's, then i will appreciate them more.
Nigel Goodwin said:I don't dispute that some AVR's are faster than some PIC's (but Atmel don't do a low spec range), MicroChip are still producing (and selling) chips they have been making since well before Atmel decided to try and grab a slice of the market. But the high end PIC's are as fast, and faster, than AVR's - however, for 99% of applications speed isn't a concern anyway.
Do you happen to have sample code you'd like to share? The dsPIC still seems very intimidating to me and I'd love to see an example.Oznog said:I've been doing extensive work with the dsPIC 33F series.
Not just 40MIPs, the 16 bit core is efficient, esp if you need 16 bit math which is fairly common. Can easily use a single instruction in place or 4 or 8 that it might take on an 8-bit core. And yeah without bank switching it's not only fewer instructions but easier to write for.
The DMA controller is a great, great feature. Collect readings from the peripheral modules and dump them directly into data memory without interrupts. In fact you can even Idle the core while leaving the peripheral modules and DMA controller working, only restarting the core when a buffer is filled.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?