PDA

View Full Version : What competitors chips do!


Ioannis
- 13th March 2010, 19:04
Look and hear this un-believable microcontroller from AVR @ 20MHz:

http://www.linusakesson.net/scene/craft/

Welldone Linus!

Ioannis
mackrackit
- 13th March 2010, 20:22
Is it the chip or the coder?
I do not think I could do that no matter what chip I had.

Is there really a big difference between the chips?
keithdoxey
- 13th March 2010, 20:49
WOW !!!! That is totally awesome
Darrel Taylor
- 13th March 2010, 20:59
An Atmel chip running @ 20Mhz, is like a PIC with an 80Mhz OSC.

They don't divide FOSC/4.
Archangel
- 13th March 2010, 21:00
Is it the chip or the coder?
I do not think I could do that no matter what chip I had.

Is there really a big difference between the chips?
I quote skimask: It's the guy behind the keyboard, oh and what Darrel said too :)
mackrackit
- 13th March 2010, 21:06
Darrel,
Could you do it with an 8 bit PIC?
Darrel Taylor
- 13th March 2010, 21:51
Darrel,
Could you do it with an 8 bit PIC?

Oh sure ....
But I'm a little busy right now trying to get Windows running on a 16F877A. :rolleyes:
mackrackit
- 13th March 2010, 22:34
Windows 3.1 or Vista :D
Normnet
- 13th March 2010, 22:55
I have done a PC monitor VGA with a 40MHz PIC in assembly but the pixels are actually a
block of pixels maybe 4x4 as the PIC cannot change the output any faster.

Haven't tried the newer faster PICS but would some day like to try FPGA's.

See dsPIC30/33 or PIC24 for a VGA display project? (http://www.microchip.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=461821&mpage=1&key=��)

Norm
Darrel Taylor
- 13th March 2010, 23:00
On Linus' page Ioannis linked to.
He describes an out PORTC,register command that reads a variable and puts it out on the PORT in a single instruction cycle.

That would take a minimum of 2 instructions on a PIC.

Since the atmel doesn't divide FOSC/4, and takes half as long for some intructions.
The PIC would have to be running @ 160Mhz to get the same video response. :eek:
Normnet
- 13th March 2010, 23:23
The PIC would have to be running @ 160Mhz to get the same video response.
Or perhaps 4 40MHz PICs in parallel with some logic to sequence their output.

What is the fastest PIC PBP 2.6 will support?

Norm
Darrel Taylor
- 14th March 2010, 05:28
Or perhaps 4 40MHz PICs in parallel with some logic to sequence their output.
Some innovative logic indeed.


What is the fastest PIC PBP 2.6 will support?
64Mhz
As far as I am aware.
Normnet
- 14th March 2010, 05:36
Or load some fast SRAM from an SD card and clock it out to the monitor for a single instance.
A 2nd SRAM slowly loads while the first displays.

Norm
Ioannis
- 15th March 2010, 07:10
The fact is that this chip is doing all the jobs (sound 4 channels, white noise plus video plus motion) with no extra chips, logic or FPGA. And at 20MHz.

Now I am very jellous...

Ioannis
Normnet
- 15th March 2010, 07:29
The 8 bit PIC's are slower than AVR however the 16-bit PICs will better AVR
running up to 40 MIPS with 16 bit (instructions?).

Norm
Heckler
- 15th March 2010, 17:27
I assume you all are aware of the Parallax "Propeller" micro...

It is an amazing piece of work. It is a typical(?) micro... but it has 8 cpu cores!! Each of them can share the same I/O and can pass variables to each other. Therefore you can have one core just doing one thing and another core do another thing.

Pretty amazing.

Not that I am ready to switch... I am still trying to keep up with the PIC's and PBP. I have yet to outrun the capabilities with the PIC's.

These micros are neat stuff no matter which way you go. Sure beats the heck out of the old Altair 8800 (http://www.vintage-computer.com/altair8800.shtml)

And I am perfectly happy with PicBasic Pro. It is very capable and can stand up speed-wise to most "C" programs with little or no compromise, much easier to follow for my old eyes.

Cheers
Dwight