As You can see it is physics impossible.
So forget that.
Width contention is not a huge issue, as you simply make some pins not thru-hole.
It also does not have to be 0.6", but one design target would be a pin-clone of a Std Prop, but that rather limits a Prop 2.
For a more resourced adapter, the issues are more related to pin count, and do you use double-row, or pins on all edges, or even the PinGridArray approach linked above.
The PGA gives the most pins, in the smallest area, but is less perf-board friendly.
I'd prefer a Break Out board approach, that includes PC link, and 0.1" edges, as then you only need connect what you will use.
There would probably be two variants : One a minimal version, no SDRAM, but no additional HW needed to run code. This could also double as a Debug Engine for a larger design.
First steps would be a external USB-UART, so it clones a Prop1, but USB seems it will be easy, so that adds maybe 2 more USB connectors - one for Loader testing, and one for Debug-link.
Then the sky is the limit on the more complex version.
OK, I'll accept that a DIP format is impossible. Instead of of DIP format, would it be possible to put a crystall, Prop2, power regulators, flash and SDRAM on a small board with dual rows of inline pins, with each row on either side of the board instead?
EDIT: Looks like I was a little slow in responding. Maybe my use of the term DIP was confusing. I probably should have said DIL instead. Oh, and the spacing between the two rows doesn't have to be 0.6 inches, or whatever the DIP spacing implied. It can be whatever multiple of 0.1" will accomodate the Prop2.
VGA connectors, big SRAM, SD cards, etc..are very nice...but get very expensive quickly! Also, I am not interested in doing any soldering, board layouts or purchasing boards from 3rd parties. So, I am hoping that Ken keeps his promise of a "quickstart board" offered through parallax for the propeller 2.
A minimalist break out board or board with just enough support components to get the Prop II running is what I want. Voltage regulator(s), XTAL, caps, and such. Not even buttons or the like.
I am not really a fan of a 128 pin .1 pitch breakout. You basically have to build a custom board for it anyway, so at minimum go with a .5 pitch, or stay surface mount preferably.
One factor on a DIP or DIL board is length of wire to pins. Maybe this is not an issue on the P2 but on the P1 distance from pins to caps were a concern for ADC inputs.
I have readed about the package of the Propeller II chip and I would like to say that I sincerely hope that you consider adding a more hobbyst-friendly package. I see that some are suggesting breakout boards and the like, well, as an hobbyst I like to build my own boards and don't rely on pre-built boards, they tend to be overly priced especially when purchased from an international reseller. Add to that that most hobbyst don't need 128 (or whatever they are) I/O pins for most applications. I think that it would be good to have a DIP40 package to replace the current Propeller chip, but if that's not possible at all, I think that a PLCC68 may be a good compromise: it can be mounted through hole using fairly inexpensive sockets, has a fair amount of additional I/O pins and can also be easily used in a SMD design in a hobbyst environment.
OK, I'll accept that a DIP format is impossible. Instead of of DIP format, would it be possible to put a crystall, Prop2, power regulators, flash and SDRAM on a small board with dual rows of inline pins, with each row on either side of the board instead?
EDIT: Looks like I was a little slow in responding. Maybe my use of the term DIP was confusing. I probably should have said DIL instead. Oh, and the spacing between the two rows doesn't have to be 0.6 inches, or whatever the DIP spacing implied. It can be whatever multiple of 0.1" will accomodate the Prop2.
We could make a DIP, like the BS2-IC. It would just have to exceed 0.600" row spacing and move to up to 0.800". That would work nicely. We could put an SDRAM on it (something useful that eats lots of pins), a boot serial FLASH chip, a crystal, voltage regulators (3.3V and 1.8V), and perhaps a USB mini-B connector. We know that there needs to be some compact-format board, as well as a general-purpose experiment board.
I'm thinking of building a 2.25" square with castellated edges that would go onto the SparkFun Bandicoot board. Any comments/complaints of that form factor?
We could make a DIP, like the BS2-IC. It would just have to exceed 0.600" row spacing and move to up to 0.800". That would work nicely. We could put an SDRAM on it (something useful that eats lots of pins), a boot serial FLASH chip, a crystal, voltage regulators (3.3V and 1.8V), and perhaps a USB mini-B connector. We know that there needs to be some compact-format board, as well as a general-purpose experiment board.
A BS2-style module sounds great! Makes it easy to use on a breadboard.
A minimalist break out board or board with just enough support components to get the Prop II running is what I want. Voltage regulator(s), XTAL, caps, and such. Not even buttons or the like.
Yes, this is the simplest end of the scale, but one detail : I would consider "enough support components to get the Prop II running " to include a USB connector and USB-232 chip.
USB connectors are small and cheap, so this may creep to allow a direct USB connect, (provided it did not push up PCB size) as I'd see that as a rapid new area for Prop 2.
I am not really a fan of a 128 pin .1 pitch breakout. You basically have to build a custom board for it anyway, so at minimum go with a .5 pitch, or stay surface mount preferably.
Not always; I have a number here with scope probe connections, and little else. Some have a few wires to drive externally.
It is rare to connect ALL pins, but 0.1" allows users to easily choose WHICH pins they connect or probe.
Think of this as a 'Hardware Data sheet'
If you want to make a higher volume module, more like an RF or Bluetooth one, then yes, edge SMD is cheap and cheerful.
How about a QuickStart like card (don't really need the buttons) with the first 32 pins plus extra "support" pins brought out to a 40 pin header compatible to the QuickStart and then a similar connector (or angle connector) brought out on the bottom edge (where the buttons are now)?
Then you could use existing QuickStart cards with either board.
Is there any more information about the P2 in terms of an updated premilinary datasheet etc? Also does the chip require 1.8V regulation separate from the 3.3V if that is used?
I am planning a complete stand-alone PC style P2 board along with breadboard area but I I will also do a small module based on my Puppy form-factor. Here is a rough layout along with a couple of extra runners on the side which are meant for top connections and the top connector on the left hand side for programming etc. I have included microSD, RAM, SPI Flash, and a FPC connector for VGA as well as distributed I/O regulators. More than likely I can see that it would be best to do this multi-layer.
Is there any more information about the P2 in terms of an updated premilinary datasheet etc?
I'd imagine that's one of those jobs that Ken has waiting for Chip's attention.
Also does the chip require 1.8V regulation separate from the 3.3V if that is used?
It'll be 1.8 volts is required for core supply, I/O supplies (On an 8-bit bank basis?) have level shifters spec'd for 1.8 to 3.3 volts. All supply pins must be connected (is another typical point).
@John - The P2 has 96 I/O pins that you could use as a virtual address and data bus but it does not directly support memory chips as far as I am aware although there is support for the fast I/O and clock for SDRAM
Does anyone know what the VP and GP pins are? I am guessing that VDD and GND are for the 1.8V core so does that mean that VP is the 1.8 to 3.3V supply per I/O block just as the GP is the ground?
"Does anyone know what the VP and GP pins are?" - The VP and GP pins allow you to supply Power and Ground directly to each group of 8 I/O pins with the execption of one group of pins only having 4 I/O's. The GP is connected to the GND but only by way of two reverse biased diodes, and is intended to distribute an ESD event. The VP can be any voltage from 1.8V to 3.3V. Where digital I/O is concerned it can be anything within that range, however for analog signals (i.e. making use of the ADC's or DAC's for that port) it is recommended that VP is at 3.3V
o---->|----o
| |
GP >---o o---< GND
| |
o----|<----o
Thanks Beau, do you have an example as to how you recommend to connect GP then?
P.S. Have you settled on a part number for this yet? I'd like to know as I have made a tailored footprint and schematic symbols for "P2".
Since it's still 8 cogs and 32-bits we could call it P8X32C or perhaps P8X128 to emphasize the 128K of RAM or perhaps P8FX32 to denote that it's fast and amongst other things sounds like an FX processor.
In fact I have labelled it P8FX128 as it's distinctive and familiar at the same time.
"do you have an example as to how you recommend to connect GP then" ... Ideally you would treat it as an analog ground versus a digital ground, but in cases where that is not critical a direct connection to GND should suffice.
"Have you settled on a part number for this yet?" ... To my knowledge no, but I could be out of the loop here myself since I only need to deal with an internal part number within Parallax.
Since it's still 8 cogs and 32-bits we could call it P8X32C or perhaps P8X128 to emphasize the 128K of RAM or perhaps P8FX32 to denote that it's fast and amongst other things sounds like an FX processor.
In fact I have labelled it P8FX128 as it's distinctive and familiar at the same time.
It is a good idea to have a common substring, so parts searches can find both series.
That makes P8X a logical prefix. The 128 is logical, as the P1 is 32 io / 32K and the P2 is 128 pins/128k
If Chip gets that timeslice threading working, then perhaps a P8XT128 ? - there T can be Turbo or Threaded....
Google says P8XT128 is not already taken.
I never liked the "P8X32A" designation. It's too much of an alphanumeric jumble and doesn't resonate like "SX", "BS2", or "PIC". But, if keeping the "P8X" is necessary, why not simply "P8X2"? It still has three letter/number transitions, though, but one less than the original.
I never liked the "P8X32A" designation. It's too much of an alphanumeric jumble and doesn't resonate like "SX", "BS2", or "PIC". But, if keeping the "P8X" is necessary, why not simply "P8X2"? It still has three letter/number transitions, though, but one less than the original.
-Phil
Agreed, can't remember the name. Phil has the right idea, but that still does not roll off the tongue. The vowels are too similar, so it is an awkward voicing of P 8 X.
Comments
Agreed.
You all know what that means. Impossible. There. Now somebody will get that sorted. Might cost $$$, but it will get sorted.
That actually looks very nice. I think a Prop2 version of that would be perfect...
Width contention is not a huge issue, as you simply make some pins not thru-hole.
It also does not have to be 0.6", but one design target would be a pin-clone of a Std Prop, but that rather limits a Prop 2.
For a more resourced adapter, the issues are more related to pin count, and do you use double-row, or pins on all edges, or even the PinGridArray approach linked above.
The PGA gives the most pins, in the smallest area, but is less perf-board friendly.
I'd prefer a Break Out board approach, that includes PC link, and 0.1" edges, as then you only need connect what you will use.
There would probably be two variants : One a minimal version, no SDRAM, but no additional HW needed to run code. This could also double as a Debug Engine for a larger design.
First steps would be a external USB-UART, so it clones a Prop1, but USB seems it will be easy, so that adds maybe 2 more USB connectors - one for Loader testing, and one for Debug-link.
Then the sky is the limit on the more complex version.
That is another question.
And that be done -- As fast we have all info on SDRAM connections and all other ones that needs for that.
Spacing for be compatible with all things need be 900th (mils)
Edited.
Ps.--- with SDRAM on board --- We need only draw pins that are not used to HEADER -- that count down them on module ! -- to be manageable
Read my previous post.
I think You already learned that in Propeller world -- Nothing are impossible ( only maybe more difficult to do ).
VGA connectors, big SRAM, SD cards, etc..are very nice...but get very expensive quickly! Also, I am not interested in doing any soldering, board layouts or purchasing boards from 3rd parties. So, I am hoping that Ken keeps his promise of a "quickstart board" offered through parallax for the propeller 2.
A minimalist break out board or board with just enough support components to get the Prop II running is what I want. Voltage regulator(s), XTAL, caps, and such. Not even buttons or the like.
Keep up the good work.
We could make a DIP, like the BS2-IC. It would just have to exceed 0.600" row spacing and move to up to 0.800". That would work nicely. We could put an SDRAM on it (something useful that eats lots of pins), a boot serial FLASH chip, a crystal, voltage regulators (3.3V and 1.8V), and perhaps a USB mini-B connector. We know that there needs to be some compact-format board, as well as a general-purpose experiment board.
Yes, this is the simplest end of the scale, but one detail : I would consider "enough support components to get the Prop II running " to include a USB connector and USB-232 chip.
USB connectors are small and cheap, so this may creep to allow a direct USB connect, (provided it did not push up PCB size) as I'd see that as a rapid new area for Prop 2.
Not always; I have a number here with scope probe connections, and little else. Some have a few wires to drive externally.
It is rare to connect ALL pins, but 0.1" allows users to easily choose WHICH pins they connect or probe.
Think of this as a 'Hardware Data sheet'
If you want to make a higher volume module, more like an RF or Bluetooth one, then yes, edge SMD is cheap and cheerful.
Those are quite separate markets though.
Then you could use existing QuickStart cards with either board.
-Phil
I am planning a complete stand-alone PC style P2 board along with breadboard area but I I will also do a small module based on my Puppy form-factor. Here is a rough layout along with a couple of extra runners on the side which are meant for top connections and the top connector on the left hand side for programming etc. I have included microSD, RAM, SPI Flash, and a FPC connector for VGA as well as distributed I/O regulators. More than likely I can see that it would be best to do this multi-layer.
I'd imagine that's one of those jobs that Ken has waiting for Chip's attention.
It'll be 1.8 volts is required for core supply, I/O supplies (On an 8-bit bank basis?) have level shifters spec'd for 1.8 to 3.3 volts. All supply pins must be connected (is another typical point).
Does anyone know what the VP and GP pins are? I am guessing that VDD and GND are for the 1.8V core so does that mean that VP is the 1.8 to 3.3V supply per I/O block just as the GP is the ground?
o---->|----o | | GP >---o o---< GND | | o----|<----oP.S. Have you settled on a part number for this yet? I'd like to know as I have made a tailored footprint and schematic symbols for "P2".
Since it's still 8 cogs and 32-bits we could call it P8X32C or perhaps P8X128 to emphasize the 128K of RAM or perhaps P8FX32 to denote that it's fast and amongst other things sounds like an FX processor.
In fact I have labelled it P8FX128 as it's distinctive and familiar at the same time.
"Have you settled on a part number for this yet?" ... To my knowledge no, but I could be out of the loop here myself since I only need to deal with an internal part number within Parallax.
It is a good idea to have a common substring, so parts searches can find both series.
That makes P8X a logical prefix. The 128 is logical, as the P1 is 32 io / 32K and the P2 is 128 pins/128k
If Chip gets that timeslice threading working, then perhaps a P8XT128 ? - there T can be Turbo or Threaded....
Google says P8XT128 is not already taken.
-Phil
Agreed, can't remember the name. Phil has the right idea, but that still does not roll off the tongue. The vowels are too similar, so it is an awkward voicing of P 8 X.
P2 rolls.