High-end AVR vs. low-end ARM?
in [Embedded]
|
From: Bresco on 6 Nov 2008 16:42 In terms of pricing, how do high-end AVR's (Mega-128) compare to low-end ARM processors? The ARM's are much more powerfull and have large RAM memories on them. Anyone ever compare them? I heard that ARM's are cheaper than AVR's these days. Is this true?
From: Leon on 6 Nov 2008 16:50 On 6 Nov, 21:42, "Bresco" <bre...(a)mixmaster.org> wrote: > In terms of pricing, how do high-end AVR's (Mega-128) compare to low-end ARM > processors? The ARM's are much more powerfull and have large RAM memories on > them. > > Anyone ever compare them? I heard that ARM's are cheaper than AVR's these > days. Is this true? ARM chips like the NXP LPC2000 can be cheaper than high-end AVRs, and offer much more performance. However, they consume more power and could work out more expensive by the time they are put on a PCB, because of the requirement for two supplies. Leon
From: An Schwob in the USA on 7 Nov 2008 00:37 On Nov 6, 1:50 pm, Leon <leon...(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > On 6 Nov, 21:42, "Bresco" <bre...(a)mixmaster.org> wrote: > > > In terms of pricing, how do high-end AVR's (Mega-128) compare to low-end ARM > > processors? The ARM's are much more powerfull and have large RAM memories on > > them. > > > Anyone ever compare them? I heard that ARM's are cheaper than AVR's these > > days. Is this true? > > ARM chips like the NXP LPC2000 can be cheaper than high-end AVRs, and > offer much more performance. However, they consume more power and > could work out more expensive by the time they are put on a PCB, > because of the requirement for two supplies. > > Leon Hi, @ Leon, I agree in everything but one, the power consumption. For example the mentioned LPC2000 can run with 40 mAs @ 70 MHz (2103), my guess would be you need 10 AVRs, running @ 16 MHz to match the performance in computing. AFAIK they need more than 4 mAs @ 16 MHz. On the other hand there is a HUGE difference in standby current. AVRs at least the older ones can go into standby mode at or below 1uA, if one if the ARM devices gets hot the standby current exceeds 100 uAs easily. There is another reason why to stick with AVR, simplicity. If you are familiar with AVR, you can finish your project a lot faster than using an ARM. Given a scenario where you start a new project and you wonder whether the AVR will be powerful enough, go with the ARM, it is going to provide more for he money. If your deadline is the most important topic and the AVR is powerful enough, spend the extra money and stay with the 8-bit. As for AVR32, in case you were thinking about that one, there is no real reason I would know why to start with that device. Use a Cortex- M3 device instead the upcoming standard. AnSchwob
From: linnix on 7 Nov 2008 10:47 On Nov 6, 9:37 pm, An Schwob in the USA <schwo...(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Nov 6, 1:50 pm, Leon <leon...(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > > > On 6 Nov, 21:42, "Bresco" <bre...(a)mixmaster.org> wrote: > > > > In terms of pricing, how do high-end AVR's (Mega-128) compare to low-end ARM > > > processors? The ARM's are much more powerfull and have large RAM memories on > > > them. > > > > Anyone ever compare them? I heard that ARM's are cheaper than AVR's these > > > days. Is this true? > > > ARM chips like the NXP LPC2000 can be cheaper than high-end AVRs, and > > offer much more performance. However, they consume more power and > > could work out more expensive by the time they are put on a PCB, > > because of the requirement for two supplies. > > > Leon > > Hi, > > @ Leon, I agree in everything but one, the power consumption. For > example the mentioned LPC2000 can run with 40 mAs @ 70 MHz (2103), my > guess would be you need 10 AVRs, running @ 16 MHz to match the > performance in computing. AFAIK they need more than 4 mAs @ 16 MHz. > On the other hand there is a HUGE difference in standby current. AVRs > at least the older ones can go into standby mode at or below 1uA, if > one if the ARM devices gets hot the standby current exceeds 100 uAs > easily. Just one more thing. The 1.8V to 5.5V operating range for the AVR is very useful for battery devices. You usually need higher than 1.8V, even for ARM with build-in regulator.
From: Anton Erasmus on 7 Nov 2008 11:02 On Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:37:58 -0800 (PST), An Schwob in the USA <schwobus(a)aol.com> wrote: >On Nov 6, 1:50�pm, Leon <leon...(a)btinternet.com> wrote: >> On 6 Nov, 21:42, "Bresco" <bre...(a)mixmaster.org> wrote: >> >> > In terms of pricing, how do high-end AVR's (Mega-128) compare to low-end ARM >> > processors? The ARM's are much more powerfull and have large RAM memories on >> > them. >> >> > Anyone ever compare them? I heard that ARM's are cheaper than AVR's these >> > days. Is this true? >> >> ARM chips like the NXP LPC2000 can be cheaper than high-end AVRs, and >> offer much more performance. However, they consume more power and >> could work out more expensive by the time they are put on a PCB, >> because of the requirement for two supplies. >> >> Leon > >Hi, > >@ Leon, I agree in everything but one, the power consumption. For >example the mentioned LPC2000 can run with 40 mAs @ 70 MHz (2103), my >guess would be you need 10 AVRs, running @ 16 MHz to match the >performance in computing. AFAIK they need more than 4 mAs @ 16 MHz. >On the other hand there is a HUGE difference in standby current. AVRs >at least the older ones can go into standby mode at or below 1uA, if >one if the ARM devices gets hot the standby current exceeds 100 uAs >easily. > >There is another reason why to stick with AVR, simplicity. If you are >familiar with AVR, you can finish your project a lot faster than using >an ARM. Given a scenario where you start a new project and you wonder >whether the AVR will be powerful enough, go with the ARM, it is going >to provide more for he money. If your deadline is the most important >topic and the AVR is powerful enough, spend the extra money and stay >with the 8-bit. As soon as code size goes over 64K, then the simplicity of the AVR vanishes. Not having 24bit or 32bit pointers causes all sorts of problems. Also if one need to execute code from RAM space, then AVR is a no go. The Cortex-M3 devices tend to have a built in regulator for gnerating all the needed supplies from one supply. They are also a LOT cheaper when one starts looking at >= 128K flash . The Cortex-M3 devices has removed a lot of the complexity one has to deal with when using the ARM7 and ARM9 MCUs. ATMEGA128-16AU is US$15 while a LM3S1607-IQR50 is US$5 in single quantities at Digikey. The ATMEGA128 is 16MHz, 8Bit with 128K of flash. The LM3S1607 is 50MHz, 32bit with 128K of flash. >As for AVR32, in case you were thinking about that one, there is no >real reason I would know why to start with that device. Use a Cortex- >M3 device instead the upcoming standard. Agreed. Regards Anton Erasmus
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Prev: Registration of MAC addresses Next: Pic16f877 measuring pressure |