| Author |
Message |
|
|
 Posted: Apr 19, 2012 - 04:11 PM |
|
Joined: Apr 07, 2011
Posts: 33
Location: Utah, USA
|
|
Hi everyone, I've lately been dabbling with a few of the more higher power microcontroller families and I was wondering what your opinions were about ARM vs Renesas.
If you have any opinions/pointers to what family would be the most beneficial to focus on, feel free to share.
Thanks! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 19, 2012 - 05:04 PM |
|
Joined: Sep 12, 2009
Posts: 2401
Location: Sacramento, CA
|
|
Everybody makes ARM devices, so you'll have an enormous selection, starting from not much more than $1. And everybody makes ARM tools. And everybody makes ARM boards to play with. And everybody has ARM forums.
Seems like ARM is the dabbler's delight. You can get an STM32VLDiscovery board for about $9. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 19, 2012 - 06:58 PM |
|
Joined: Jul 21, 2005
Posts: 1373
|
|
Never touched Renasas, I have experience with ARM and it is pretty smooth depending on the documentation and app notes from each particular vendor.
But both are just a platform like any other, so why not just learn both? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 19, 2012 - 07:34 PM |
|
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 9826
Location: Trondheim, Norway
|
|
I've just started to get into Atmel's ARMs through testing Atmel Studio 6 internally, and I quite like it - haven't tried Renesas. So far I've discovered after comparing this to my last ARM attempt that the tools, development environment and chip peripheral design makes up 99% of the experience, and the actual core design used to shift the bits around doesn't really matter.
On that note, while everyone makes ARM core devices, remember that everyone also has different peripheral designs - so unless you are using something simple like a USART, your code isn't really "recompile and run" portable anyway if you swap vendors.
- Dean  |
_________________
Atmel Studio 6.1 is now released, grab it here.
Report AS6/ASF bugs here.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 19, 2012 - 07:56 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 17, 2004
Posts: 6137
Location: Great Smokey Mountains.
|
|
The title and OP makes no sense since Renesas makes an ARM based product.
So my 'honest opinion' is that you should be looking for various Renesas competitors like Atmel who also make ARMs and try to compare their ARM implementations.
Smiley |
_________________
FREE TUTORIAL: 'Quick Start Guide for Using the WinAVR C Compiler with ATMEL's AVR Butterfly' AVAILABLE AT: http://www.smileymicros.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 19, 2012 - 08:00 PM |
|
Joined: Jul 18, 2005
Posts: 62299
Location: (using avr-gcc in) Finchingfield, Essex, England
|
|
|
Quote:
So far I've discovered after comparing this to my last ARM attempt that the tools, development environment and chip peripheral design makes up 99% of the experience, and the actual core design used to shift the bits around doesn't really matter.
And this for money is where ARM really scores for those who've been using avr-gcc and want to "trade up". Same compiler, same linker, same debug format, same options, same binutils.
I came the other way - deeply steeped in the lore of arm-gcc (actually patr of a Linux ARM development) and loved the fact that this tiddly little 8 bit micro had the same "grown ups" compiler and toolchain available for it. It's just a shame that the debug side of things (gdb, avarice, simulavr) are not as advanced as they are in the arm-gcc world. (well OK gdb is but it's avarice that is the block to being able to use exactly the same tools as you do for arm-gcc development).
As for Renasas. Who?
(OK I know who but you get the point?) |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 19, 2012 - 09:33 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 22, 2002
Posts: 12049
Location: Tangent, OR, USA
|
|
Maybe a "better" question would be AVR32 vs ARM???????
Jim |
_________________
Jim Wagner
Oregon Research Electronics, Consulting Div.
Tangent, OR, USA
"The only thing standing between us and victory is defeat" P.G.Wodhouse in Wooster & Jeeves series
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 19, 2012 - 09:43 PM |
|
Joined: Oct 04, 2008
Posts: 410
|
|
I (being a hobbyist) have tried to get an insight what I can do with ARM timers from NXP, ST and Atmel. May be they are "all the same" but Atmel's explanation and documentation was by far the easiest to understand for me. I really like their documentation!
Compare this: http://www.atmel.com/Images/11100.pdf
with what the others offer... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 19, 2012 - 09:51 PM |
|
Joined: Sep 12, 2009
Posts: 2401
Location: Sacramento, CA
|
|
|
gdhospers wrote:
I (being a hobbyist) have tried to get an insight what I can do with ARM timers from NXP, ST and Atmel. May be they are "all the same" but Atmel's explanation and documentation was by far the easiest to understand for me. I really like their documentation!
Compare this: http://www.atmel.com/Images/11100.pdf
with what the others offer...
Wow, still only fixed prescales on their timers? Am I reading that right? Atmel, what were you thinking?! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 20, 2012 - 12:16 AM |
|
Joined: Dec 30, 2004
Posts: 8771
Location: Melbourne,Australia
|
|
No lack of flexibility on the STM32 timers, but the more options you have, the harder it is to figure out. My first attempt at getting a STM32 timer to work similar to an AVR took a bit longer than expected and needed a work around. Not sure if it was just me of the avtual hardware. One day I'll post the question on the ST forums. NXP timers seem to work as expected.
As for the OP's question, the eval boards are dirt cheap these days so to try both is not unreasonable. The deciding factor for me is the cost/features of the tools. For a hobbyist, the free tools are probably the deciding factor. For me, NXP is the winner at the moment.
As for Atmel's offerings, i did a SAM7 project a few years ago that was rather torturous as i used a cobbled together mix of eclipse and gcc. Things like startup files took a while to get working. The prepackaged solutions like Rowley and CodeRed are much nicer. As for ST, the Attolic offering is now code limited to 32k which is next to useless. No comment on Studio6 as i've not ventured down the SAM3 path nor on the Renesas tools. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 20, 2012 - 12:46 AM |
|
Joined: Jun 15, 2009
Posts: 134
Location: Northern California
|
|
|
ka7ehk wrote:
Maybe a "better" question would be AVR32 vs ARM???????
I'm a big fan of the AVR32 and the ARM, so I'll comment here.
First, a couple of observations on the original post in this thread. What do you mean by "higher power"? Compared to what? An MSP430, for example? Secondly, I assume you realize that the ARM family ranges from the Cortex-M0 on the low end up to the big A9 on the high end. That's quite a range.
In my opinion, the ARM Cortex-M3 and the AVR32 UC3 are more alike than different. They offer roughly the same performance and similar peripherals. The CPU architectures are very similar too, and if you're programming primarily in C, you won't even notice the differences.
The big difference is in vendor support. The AVR32 is Atmel, and only Atmel. If Atmel drops the AVR32, it's done for. ARM, on the other hand, is NXP, and STMicro, and TI, and Freescale, etc, etc. Heck, even Atmel does ARM.
ARM has a much wider range of tools available for it. With the AVR32 you're pretty much stuck with the Atmel tools. With ARM you have many more choices.
If I had to bet on which of these two architectures will still be available five years from now, all my money would be on ARM. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 20, 2012 - 05:39 AM |
|
Joined: Dec 26, 2006
Posts: 1407
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
|
| hhm... i have been wondering lately if I should invest my time with atmel ARM chips instead of the UC3... hhm.... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 20, 2012 - 10:17 AM |
|
Joined: Jul 18, 2005
Posts: 62299
Location: (using avr-gcc in) Finchingfield, Essex, England
|
|
|
Quote:
up to the big A9 on the high end.
This suggests A-15 in fact:
BTW to OP which ARm and which Renasas were you considering? I assume from Renasas in 32bit you are talking about the old NEC SuperH? Or did you mean the V850? About 12 years ago I remember when I went to Microsoft in Seattle to see the new "Windows CE" and the only option then was to run it on an NEC processor which I think was the forerunner of the V850 (would it have been V405?). Needless to say Microsoft did not get very far in the embedded world with "CE" when they wanted to charge $50 (like Windows) per unit for the operating system when the likes of VxWorks was <$1 per unit! |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 20, 2012 - 06:21 PM |
|
Joined: Jun 15, 2009
Posts: 134
Location: Northern California
|
|
|
luvocean1 wrote:
hhm... i have been wondering lately if I should invest my time with atmel ARM chips instead of the UC3... hhm....
The UC3/Atmel Studio 6/AVR ONE! combination is growing on me. I really like this environment, and would like it much better except for the following:
Compiler bugs (found a number of them, but I'm porting an RTOS to the UC3, and that really pushes a compiler...) and the poor Atmel documentation.
Regarding the documentation, it leaves a lot to be desired as the user guides leave many things up to interpretation when they should be specified completely and accurately. When I'm writing a device driver for a peripheral, I don't want to scratch my head wondering exactly how this bit in that register works, etc. It should be rigorously specified, not wishy-washy. Many things are missing too. Case in point: try to find anything describing the C calling convention in the Atmel documentation. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 20, 2012 - 07:03 PM |
|
Joined: Jul 18, 2005
Posts: 62299
Location: (using avr-gcc in) Finchingfield, Essex, England
|
|
|
Quote:
except for the following:
Which then sounds like pretty much everything! What if anything makes UC3 development better than ARM development?
I guess the acid test of AS6 is to use arm-gcc which is a much more mature compiler than avr32-gcc or avr-gcc. |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 20, 2012 - 07:53 PM |
|
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 9826
Location: Trondheim, Norway
|
|
|
Quote:
Regarding the documentation, it leaves a lot to be desired as the user guides leave many things up to interpretation when they should be specified completely and accurately. When I'm writing a device driver for a peripheral, I don't want to scratch my head wondering exactly how this bit in that register works, etc. It should be rigorously specified, not wishy-washy. Many things are missing too. Case in point: try to find anything describing the C calling convention in the Atmel documentation.
Would you be able to write up your thoughts on this and PM/email them to me, if you have the time? I'm sure the training team would love some directional feedback on how to improve, and I can direct the rest to the relevant teams (hardware and software).
- Dean |
_________________
Atmel Studio 6.1 is now released, grab it here.
Report AS6/ASF bugs here.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 21, 2012 - 01:13 AM |
|
Joined: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 956
Location: SF Bay area
|
|
"Renesas" is a big company with several different CPU architectures and a hell of a lot of chips ranging from 8-bit enhanced Z80s (or smaller) to linux-capable 32bit chips. "ARM" is family of several related 32bit architectures implemented by a wide variety of vendors, also spanning a wide range of performance.
"ARM or Renesas" is not a very meaningful question...
One thing to think about is that while ARM might seem to offer multiple sources, each vendor gets to include their own peripheral mix on the chips. If your application ends up relying on peripheral features, you probably end up just as single-sourced with an ARM as you would with a Renesas. Or a UC3... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 21, 2012 - 02:42 AM |
|
Joined: Jun 15, 2009
Posts: 134
Location: Northern California
|
|
|
clawson wrote:
Quote:
except for the following:
Which then sounds like pretty much everything! What if anything makes UC3 development better than ARM development?
It's not necessarily better, just different. The AVR32 has that exotic feel to it that the ubiquitous ARM doesn't. And like most Americans, I like to root for the underdog. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 21, 2012 - 05:48 AM |
|
Joined: Dec 18, 2001
Posts: 4711
|
|
If professional... consider which is more valuable on the resume'.
(ARM) |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Apr 21, 2012 - 06:13 AM |
|
Joined: Jun 15, 2009
Posts: 134
Location: Northern California
|
|
|
stevech wrote:
If professional... consider which is more valuable on the resume'.
(ARM)
Absolutely. No disagreement there.
I do this as a hobby (after doing it professionally for >20 years), so I can afford to play around with a little bit of everything, including oddballs like the AVR32. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Maximize
RSS
