View Full Version : best microprocessor
what is the better microprocessor?
BasicX::::The original BX-24 has been replaced by the faster BX24p-u industrial (RoHS) version. http://www.basicx.com/ ARM7::::Just released our most powerful microcontroller (ARM7TDMI-S CPU Core Philips LPC2119 Micorocontroller)module yet. Featuring a huge 128k of Flash Program Memory together with a high speed 16/32 bit processor running up to a maximum speed of 58.9824MHz. This high-performance module is ideal for the most complex and demanding of applications, with on-board A/D Convertors, Real Time Clocks, CAN interfaces and much more. All combined in a very compact interchangeable module at a very cost effective price,
Excellent value at only - $24.90. (http://www.futurlec.com/ET-ARM_Stamp.shtml) http://www.futurlec.com/index.shtml
or AVR::::Atmel ATMega128 microcontroller. http://www.futurlec.com/ET-AVR_Stamp.shtml·· USD (http://www.futurlec.com/ET-AVR_Stamp.shtml USD) $19.90
for image processing
bottom line which is more capable of· more complex stuff· and with room to spare of the 3?
03-27-2007, 04:30 AM
I suggest you ask at the BasicX and Futurelec websites. This is after all a Parallax support website and none of those mentioned are Parallax processors.
The Propeller does not have the flash memory of the ARM7 and, although it can do A/D conversion, multiple real time clocks, and much more, it does it all in software with multiple (8) identical processors at a higher speed (80-96MHz). I've not seen a CAN interface, but there may be one already done in the Propeller Object Exchange.
03-27-2007, 04:59 AM
Better Microprocessor? Well my totally unbiased opinion is the Propeller rocks them all! You can make your purchase at the following link…Take care!
Parallax Tech Support
03-27-2007, 06:54 AM
Many of us, especially me, need support. Therefore, Parallax is the only solution. As in the old days, I, too, look at everything and drool. Then, I go back to where the support is lengendary and the forum members tolerate my ignorance.
This may change. If so, so will I.
You are what you write.
03-27-2007, 07:42 AM
Easy - Basic Stamp www.parallax.com/html_pages/products/basicstamps/basic_stamps.asp (http://www.parallax.com/html_pages/products/basicstamps/basic_stamps.asp)
Cheap and Easy - SX www.parallax.com/sx/index.asp (http://www.parallax.com/sx/index.asp)
Powerful, Fast and Easy - Propeller www.parallax.com/propeller/index.asp (http://www.parallax.com/propeller/index.asp)
03-27-2007, 08:20 AM
Of course, you are correct. However, I need something simple while I learn enough about digital electronics to do something . . . MAGNIFICENT!!!
Just a joke, if I can manage to make something MOVE under microcontroller control I will be happy. And, I will probably never really understand digital electronics. I imagine I will develop a very good empirical knowledge, however.
I have no illusions, only dreams.
ps But, I took up the sport of long-distance shooting about a year and half ago and today--in a certain speciality--I am very close to the world record. But, I use a pistol and the world record was set with a rifle.
You are what you write.
image processing, object avoidance, vision avoidance IS A LOT of processing! (ARM9?)
I would attack the problem from a different direction. Use you Workstation to solve the problem first
You will save a lot of time getting up to speed because it takes a long time to download and test all the time and you won't have to learn about a chip and tool chain $$ only to find you need more power than it can provide. After you get good at these kind of problems downsize to a smaller platform(s)
Use google and start by doing what others have done with success first.
And if you are still itching to drop some cash on something that might work... Resist.
Good luck have fun
03-29-2007, 03:55 AM
Object avoidance can be done with discrete components , Image processing can be done in varying degrees of resolution using 8 bit micro controllers that can do low end too Pentium processors with gigahertz speeds and 64 bit processors. Your question runs the gamut, you must first define your input and output data then select a processor that can do the job, calculating price trade offs as well as power available to the system and speed as well as size constraints.
Think Inside the box first and if that doesn't work..
Re-arrange what's inside the box then...
Think outside the BOX!
03-29-2007, 09:35 AM
FYI the CMUcam does image processing and object tracking - using a $3 SX28 processor www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=30051 (http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=30051)
03-30-2007, 09:43 PM
Dont try to do everything with one processor, pain in the butt to program.
Try a coprocessor or a bunch of them:)
ARM Cortex are better than plain ARMs
How much power do you have?
Lots? go for embedded PC like NANO ITX
Smaller batteries then AVR32 will run linux.
Cost/time, how much time do you have?
pick easiest one to use.
Aint no such animal as a "perfect" micro.
Prop is nice but sure could use some more memory, OS plus SD card is a way to fix that.
SX chips are fast but everything is done in software, use SXbasic.
Basic stamps? toys for boys:)
128K is not much for vision stuff, think 512k and more.