Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Tongue in cheek comparison of several micros — Parallax Forums

Tongue in cheek comparison of several micros

Martin HodgeMartin Hodge Posts: 1,246
edited 2010-03-13 19:27 in General Discussion
It's a little biased... maybe...

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
-MH

Comments

  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2010-03-12 20:52
    The poor PIC really gets beat up around here, doesn't it?

    -Phil
  • Oldbitcollector (Jeff)Oldbitcollector (Jeff) Posts: 8,091
    edited 2010-03-12 21:15
    Not quite accurate... [noparse];)[/noparse]

    OBC

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Coming soon to a browser near you! PropellerPowered.com
    Visit the: PROPELLERPOWERED SIG forum kindly hosted by Savage Circuits.
    300 x 300 - 8K
  • W9GFOW9GFO Posts: 4,010
    edited 2010-03-12 21:20
    Hmm, I could actually make use of that old dozer...

    Rich H

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    The Simple Servo Tester, a kit from Gadget Gangster.
  • John R.John R. Posts: 1,376
    edited 2010-03-12 21:50
    Sandbox toys ARE fun...

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    John R.
    Click here to see my Nomad Build Log
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2010-03-12 23:07
    Microchip sells more chips than all the others put together, and makes a lot more money. The 16-bit PICs outperform the SX and AVR.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Leon Heller
    Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
  • MicrocontrolledMicrocontrolled Posts: 2,461
    edited 2010-03-12 23:26
    @OBC: ROTFL!!! lol.giflol.gif

    @Leon: But PICs are SO WEIRD. They're built like "Well, pin 2 you can output analog, and on pin 5 you have a serial line....." it's like when a grade school kid makes a poster of different pictures, all strewn about with no apparent order. They seem like no organization went into them, and yet they are cheap enough to be one of the most popular chip today. I stick with the ol Prop. Any pin can be anything and you have full versatility.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Don't click on this.....

    Use the Propeller icon!! Propeller.gif
  • Martin HodgeMartin Hodge Posts: 1,246
    edited 2010-03-12 23:36
    Leon, has your humor chip blown or something? [noparse][[/noparse]rolleyes]

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    -MH
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2010-03-12 23:43
    Leon is right, though. And that's one reason MCHP stock is one of the cornerstones of my IRA -- even though I haven't used a PIC in a long while.

    -Phil
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2010-03-12 23:45
    microcontrolled said...
    @OBC: ROTFL!!! lol.giflol.gif

    @Leon: But PICs are SO WEIRD. They're built like "Well, pin 2 you can output analog, and on pin 5 you have a serial line....." it's like when a grade school kid makes a poster of different pictures, all strewn about with no apparent order. They seem like no organization went into them, and yet they are cheap enough to be one of the most popular chip today. I stick with the ol Prop. Any pin can be anything and you have full versatility.

    That's because PICs (and AVRs) have hardware to do things that require software on the Propeller, leaving more memory for applications. In some situations it's an advantage. The Propeller is far too expensive for the sort of applications PICs and AVRs are typically used for, and doesn't have on-chip USB or Ethernet hardware.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Leon Heller
    Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM

    Post Edited (Leon) : 3/12/2010 11:56:31 PM GMT
  • HollyMinkowskiHollyMinkowski Posts: 1,398
    edited 2010-03-13 00:00
    I don't care for the PICs (I started with pic)

    I do like AVRs though and use them with the Prop on many projects.
    I often use the mega168 and a prop...I have a bunch of mega168 chips laying around.
    The pico-power mega644p is also a nice addition to a prop project.
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2010-03-13 00:03
    Leon said...
    That's because PICs (and AVRs) have hardware to do things that require software on the Propeller...
    Or, stated another way, the Propeller can do things in software that require specialized hardware perpherals in PICs and AVRs. To me, software peripherals seem easier, since there's so much less to remember, and I don't have to worry about pin assignments.

    -Phil
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2010-03-13 00:22
    The newer 16-bit PICs have software selectable pins for peripheral functions. A 16-bit PIC is used with the Propeller on the Chameleon, but I forget if it is one that has that capability.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Leon Heller
    Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
  • localrogerlocalroger Posts: 3,452
    edited 2010-03-13 01:12
    Phil: Or, stated another way, the Propeller can do things in software that require specialized hardware perpherals in PICs and AVRs.

    This. If the PIC does what you want, great; it will probably be cheaper. But Gaia help you if you should want to do a little bit more in a way that it can't. On the Prop if you've got another cog it can be a UART (or four!), another video channel, PS/2 input, SPI or IIC interface, whatever you might need. On the PIC, if it has 2 UARTs and you realize you need 3, uh-oh too bad. It only ever has one each SPI and IIC and if you don't want to try making the SD card and SPI RAM play nice together, uh-oh, too bad. If you'd like the your four SPI RAMs to be reading all at the same time for better throughput uh-oh, too bad. And so on.

    I just put together a Daisy MP3 player kit, which uses a DIP40 PIC18F45J10. The chip does what it needs to and costs about 1/4 what a Prop would, so cool. But how much would it add to a $115 kit to upgrade to a Prop? (In fairness I think when Daisy was designed the Prop was $25, but still.) And while it's open source reprogramming the PIC requires a hardware link and USD$200 C compiler. So while it would be easy enough for me to add the SDHC support that it came without and I need (oddly it does use and even require FAT32 despite being SD only), it was cheaper for me to buy a Rogue Robotics uMP3 instead, which also came out of the box not understanding SDHC but could accept a serial firmware upgrade. For which, since my PC doesn't have a serial port, I used my propplug.

    There is also a lot to be said for having the firmware on a socketed DIP8 EEPROM. This is a space effective and extremely convenient thing even if the Prop itself is SMT. Not having the firmware on the Prop absolutely is a feature, not a bug, as a lifetime of service experience insists. Generic programmers that can copy a IIC EEPROM are common, and you can even make one out of a demoboard with a little effort. For the PIC family, not so much.
  • BeanBean Posts: 8,129
    edited 2010-03-13 01:50
    The only PICs that impress me are the 10F222. Amazing stuff in a 6-pin SOT23 package.

    Bean

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Use BASIC on the Propeller with the speed of assembly language.

    PropBASIC thread http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php?p=867134

    March 2010 Nuts and Volts article·http://www.parallax.com/Portals/0/Downloads/docs/cols/nv/prop/col/nvp5.pdf
    ·
  • mikestefoymikestefoy Posts: 84
    edited 2010-03-13 13:22
    I have a great admiration for Leon.

    He will put his hand in the fire, without fear.

    I recently likened him to Joan of Arc, being English (61), it is both a compliment, and a criticism.

    I also love PIC's, I also like ARM.

    I am still waiting for an application of mine to shout " this must be a prop !!".

    people here seem to use an $8 prop where a $2 PIC is more cost effective.

    about 3 years ago I classed the prop as " a curio", its still the case.

    why are Rayman et al castrating a beautiful 4.3" Colour (sic) graphics LCD capable of 200K colours by using a prop so it can only display 64 colours(sic), when an ARM LPC2478 cost $13 does so much more.

    I like the prop architecture. when I need 4 or more serial ports, or 32 PWM outputs, or video speed, then a prop comes into its own.

    BUT as usual "its solution must fit the problem"

    I have 3 ( maybe 4) prop proto boards, but never powered them up in 3 years.

    I check the prop forums every day, and am fascinated and impressed with the quality of intellect on the site

    WE English love to be heretics

    Mike
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2010-03-13 15:29
    @mikestefoy, cost effectiveness is a very relative consideration. If you are designing/building something that will be sold by the tens of thousands through the retail chains then by all means look for the lowest cost chip that does what you need to do.

    On the other hand if you are producing very small quantities of custom or semi custom products the price difference between chips is insignificant in the overall cost.

    Far better to pay a little extra for a chip like the Prop and reap the benefits of a lower learning curve and ultra flexibility it's design makes possible.
  • mikestefoymikestefoy Posts: 84
    edited 2010-03-13 19:10
    @kwinn,

    I totally agree

    Mike
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2010-03-13 19:27
    Mike:

    I wish I was 61, I'm coming up to 68. smile.gif

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Leon Heller
    Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
Sign In or Register to comment.