AVR-Chat

I have been using the Atmel AVR series (ATMega16, ATMega32A mostly).  

I have an STK-500 but I don’t use it too much, mostly I use the ICE-Cube JTAG device
with either my own boards or purchased development boards.  I use AVR Studio
w/WinAVR for program development.

I have heard a lot of talk about Atmel ARM devices and I figure I should take a good
look at them before I decide to continue with AVR or migrate to ARM.  

My projects are mostly personal and, in general, are not especially processor
intensive.  I am working on one project that I intend to market (Small market,
realistically probably no more than 200-300 units).  I use a variety of digital I/O,
analog inputs, PWM, USART, TWI, just now getting into CAN, have not yet used USB ...

I have been very happy with the AVR line and it has served me well.  I'm not
necessarily looking to switch.

Question: From my limited web readings, I gather that "ARM" is a processor type
produced by many companies and not a proprietary design.  Can someone point me to a
web article that compares Atmel AVR .vs. Atmel ARM with specific
advantages/disadvantages?  If you have switched from AVR to ARM, reasons?
 
Cheers,

Chuck Hackett
"Good judgment comes from experience, experience comes from bad judgment"
7.5" gauge Union Pacific Northern (4-8-4) 844 http://www.whitetrout.net/Chuck

Other ARM chips like those from  NXP and ST, especially their newer 
Cortex-M0 and -M3 parts, are much better than the Atmel ARM range.

Leon
-- 
Leon Heller
G1HSM

However, IMO, none of the Arm development environments is as easy to use 
as the AVR ones.  My current choices for simple projects would be AVR, 
PIC24F and dead last ARM.

YMMV of course,
DLC

On 11/28/10 12:04 PM, Leon Heller wrote:
> Other ARM chips like those from  NXP and ST, especially their newer
> Cortex-M0 and -M3 parts, are much better than the Atmel ARM range.
>
> Leon
>    

-- 
Dennis Clark
TTT Enterprises

On 28/11/2010 19:19, Dennis Clark wrote:
> However, IMO, none of the Arm development environments is as easy to use
> as the AVR ones.  My current choices for simple projects would be AVR,
> PIC24F and dead last ARM.

Rowley CrossWorks is streets ahead of AVR Studio. Atmel has realised how 
out of date it is and is dropping it in favour of Eclipse.

Leon
-- 
Leon Heller
G1HSM

At 06:45 AM 29/11/2010, you wrote:
>Rowley CrossWorks is streets ahead of AVR Studio.

..and a lot cheaper too....

Regards

John Samperi

********************************************************
Ampertronics Pty. Ltd.
11 Brokenwood Place Baulkham Hills, NSW 2153 AUSTRALIA
Tel. (02) 9674-6495       Fax (02) 9674-8745
Website  http://www.ampertronics.com.au
*Electronic Design * Custom Products * Contract Assembly
********************************************************

On 28/11/2010 21:02, John Samperi wrote:
> At 06:45 AM 29/11/2010, you wrote:
>> Rowley CrossWorks is streets ahead of AVR Studio.
>
> ..and a lot cheaper too....

AVR Studio doesn't support ARM.

The ease of use and additional features of CrossWorks means that 
companies using it will recoup the cost very quickly. The same IDE is be 
used for ARM, MSP430 and AVR development.

Leon
-- 
Leon Heller
G1HSM

At 09:21 AM 29/11/2010, you wrote:
>AVR Studio doesn't support ARM.

So why did you compare the two? :-)




Regards

John Samperi

********************************************************
Ampertronics Pty. Ltd.
11 Brokenwood Place Baulkham Hills, NSW 2153 AUSTRALIA
Tel. (02) 9674-6495       Fax (02) 9674-8745
Website  http://www.ampertronics.com.au
*Electronic Design * Custom Products * Contract Assembly
********************************************************

On Nov 28, 2010, at 2:21 PM, Leon Heller wrote:

> On 28/11/2010 21:02, John Samperi wrote:
> > At 06:45 AM 29/11/2010, you wrote:
> >> Rowley CrossWorks is streets ahead of AVR Studio.
> >
> > ..and a lot cheaper too....
>
> AVR Studio doesn't support ARM.
>
> The ease of use and additional features of CrossWorks means that
> companies using it will recoup the cost very quickly. The same IDE  
> is be
> used for ARM, MSP430 and AVR development.
>
> Leon
> -- 
> Leon Heller
> G1HSM
>
> 
A question -

Are the various ARM implementations consistent? That is, not only the  
core PC/ALU/memory but how ports and control registers are accessed?  
Are the internal peripherals consistent? That is, do we have the same  
registers with the same bit names in the same bit positions?

Is code written for one suplpier's ARM portable to other supplier's  
chips? Does it have to be recompiled to shift to another chip (with  
"same" features).

Thanks!
Jim Wagner
Oregon Research Electronics



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

At 09:30 AM 29/11/2010, you wrote:
>Are the various ARM implementations consistent? That is, not only the
>core PC/ALU/memory but how ports and control registers are accessed?
>Are the internal peripherals consistent? That is, do we have the same
>registers with the same bit names in the same bit positions?
>
>Is code written for one suplpier's ARM portable to other supplier's
>chips? Does it have to be recompiled to shift to another chip (with
>"same" features).

Don't know. Just downloading LPCXpresso to try out my new board
I got last week at a NXP seminar. :-)

Of course EVERY manufacturer will claim fastest performance,
lowest cost and lowest power......

The ideal thing would be to have pin compatible chips from
different manufacturer so one can change from one to the
other without pain.

Regards

John Samperi

********************************************************
Ampertronics Pty. Ltd.
11 Brokenwood Place Baulkham Hills, NSW 2153 AUSTRALIA
Tel. (02) 9674-6495       Fax (02) 9674-8745
Website  http://www.ampertronics.com.au
*Electronic Design * Custom Products * Contract Assembly
********************************************************

On 28/11/2010 22:23, John Samperi wrote:
> At 09:21 AM 29/11/2010, you wrote:
>> AVR Studio doesn't support ARM.
>
> So why did you compare the two? :-)


I think the OP asked for a comparison.

Leon
-- 
Leon Heller
G1HSM

On 28/11/2010 22:30, Jim Wagner wrote:

> A question -
>
> Are the various ARM implementations consistent? That is, not only the
> core PC/ALU/memory but how ports and control registers are accessed?
> Are the internal peripherals consistent? That is, do we have the same
> registers with the same bit names in the same bit positions?

The same ARM core will be identical for different licensees, but each 
manufacturer implements their own peripherals.

>
> Is code written for one suplpier's ARM portable to other supplier's
> chips? Does it have to be recompiled to shift to another chip (with
> "same" features).

The peripheral stuff will have to be rewritten.

Leon
-- 
Leon Heller
G1HSM

> From: Leon Heller
> 
> On 28/11/2010 22:23, John Samperi wrote:
> > At 09:21 AM 29/11/2010, you wrote:
> >> AVR Studio doesn't support ARM.
> >
> > So why did you compare the two? :-)
> 
> 
> I think the OP asked for a comparison.

OP here - Yup, I did ask for a comparison.  Good discussion so far but I haven't
heard anything that would make me want to move to ARM.  From my original post:

"My projects are mostly personal and, in general, are not especially processor
intensive.  I am working on one project that I intend to market (Small market,
realistically probably no more than 200-300 units).  I use a variety of digital I/O,
ADC inputs, PWM, USART, TWI, just now getting into CAN, have not yet used USB ..."

The only thing I would add to that is that, as my projects have become more complex
I've moved up in flash size but, so far, 16k has been enough and I'm just now moving
to a ATMega32 anticipating some more complex protocol layers.

So, anyone have a comparison of ease of programming, better peripheral mix, or other
processor family characteristics?
 
Cheers,

Chuck Hackett
"Good judgment comes from experience, experience comes from bad judgment"
7.5" gauge Union Pacific Northern (4-8-4) 844 http://www.whitetrout.net/Chuck

Hi Chuck,
 
I have been and still am a bit fan of the AVR and use them for smaller
control modules that I design. I do however have a controller that has an
LCD and a number of interfaces, CAN, RS232, RS485, 4-20mA etc and I had to
find a suitable processor for these. I stumbled across the Netburner modules
from an old college and I am currently using the MOD5234 in 2 of my designs.
The compiler, support and hardware are superb and there is a really good
user forum for them too with a nice bunch of users rather like this AVR
forum. Granted it is not ARM, but a Freescale Coldfire core but it runs at
147MHz and comes with a ton of memory so my applications can be very complex
and because of the LCD, I can build nice graphical interfaces for them. They
run UCOS 1 which is a very nice and stable real time OS.
 
I am also looking at the ARM processor for the future a I want to develop a
board that can run Android so that I can continue to have the same IO but
with the added advantage of the core OS already built and then I only have
to concentrate on the application code each time and not have to build it
into the current application each time.
 
The Stellaris range of processors are very interesting too and these are ARM
based. According to a good friend of mine, the Code Sourcery development
system is a nice option for these processor. You can find dev kits that come
with a JTAG interface over USB so they represent a nice option if you are
looking for something new to play with.
 
I will still be using the AVR (AT90CAN128 as it happens) for the remote IO
that the main controller communicates with.
 
Good luck finding a new core to play with.
 
Dave.

From: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Chuck Hackett
Sent: 29 November 2010 14:15
To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [AVR-Chat] ARM .vs. AVR
 
  
> From: Leon Heller
> 
> On 28/11/2010 22:23, John Samperi wrote:
> > At 09:21 AM 29/11/2010, you wrote:
> >> AVR Studio doesn't support ARM.
> >
> > So why did you compare the two? :-)
> 
> 
> I think the OP asked for a comparison.

OP here - Yup, I did ask for a comparison. Good discussion so far but I
haven't
heard anything that would make me want to move to ARM. From my original
post:

"My projects are mostly personal and, in general, are not especially
processor
intensive. I am working on one project that I intend to market (Small
market,
realistically probably no more than 200-300 units). I use a variety of
digital I/O,
ADC inputs, PWM, USART, TWI, just now getting into CAN, have not yet used
USB ..."

The only thing I would add to that is that, as my projects have become more
complex
I've moved up in flash size but, so far, 16k has been enough and I'm just
now moving
to a ATMega32 anticipating some more complex protocol layers.

So, anyone have a comparison of ease of programming, better peripheral mix,
or other
processor family characteristics?
 
Cheers,

Chuck Hackett




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

At 06:14 PM 29/11/2010, you wrote:
>16k has been enough and I'm just now moving to a ATMega32

Unless you have an OLD JTAG and programmer I would not use the M32
but rather the newer and pin compatible M324p. Same goes for the
older M16, use a M164p.

Regards

John Samperi

********************************************************
Ampertronics Pty. Ltd.
11 Brokenwood Place Baulkham Hills, NSW 2153 AUSTRALIA
Tel. (02) 9674-6495       Fax (02) 9674-8745
Website  http://www.ampertronics.com.au
*Electronic Design * Custom Products * Contract Assembly
********************************************************

It seems to me that if you've got all the power you need, you're  
nowhere close to running out of flash and you own and know all of the  
tools you need to work, you don't have the kind of volume that would  
pay back the investment in a lower cost or otherwise better solution,  
why change processors and start all over?

On Nov 28, 2010, at 11:14 PM, Chuck Hackett wrote:

>> From: Leon Heller
>>
>> On 28/11/2010 22:23, John Samperi wrote:
>>> At 09:21 AM 29/11/2010, you wrote:
>>>> AVR Studio doesn't support ARM.
>>>
>>> So why did you compare the two? :-)
>>
>>
>> I think the OP asked for a comparison.
>
> OP here - Yup, I did ask for a comparison.  Good discussion so far  
> but I haven't
> heard anything that would make me want to move to ARM.  From my  
> original post:
>
> "My projects are mostly personal and, in general, are not especially  
> processor
> intensive.  I am working on one project that I intend to market  
> (Small market,
> realistically probably no more than 200-300 units).  I use a variety  
> of digital I/O,
> ADC inputs, PWM, USART, TWI, just now getting into CAN, have not yet  
> used USB ..."
>
> The only thing I would add to that is that, as my projects have  
> become more complex
> I've moved up in flash size but, so far, 16k has been enough and I'm  
> just now moving
> to a ATMega32 anticipating some more complex protocol layers.
>
> So, anyone have a comparison of ease of programming, better  
> peripheral mix, or other
> processor family characteristics?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chuck Hackett
> "Good judgment comes from experience, experience comes from bad  
> judgment"
> 7.5" gauge Union Pacific Northern (4-8-4) 844 http://www.whitetrout.net/Chuck
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 08:51:25AM -0800, Philippe Habib wrote:
> It seems to me that if you've got all the power you need, you're
> nowhere close to running out of flash and you own and know all of the
> tools you need to work, you don't have the kind of volume that would
> pay back the investment in a lower cost or otherwise better solution,
> why change processors and start all over?

One good answer is that if one is only doing embedded work for one's
amusement then thats good enough excuse to expand one's horizons.

No matter, its always good to have another tool in one's pocket.

As for myself, I read these threads partly to expand horizons, partly
because I anticipate a future task for which an AVR is inadequate.

In the past when I have looked at ARM solutions many required a good bit
of hand-holding to come out of RESET. Not all, but some. Having many
vendors of similar parts is good for competition. But the results are
not always good.

-- 
David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@HiWAAY.net
========================================================================
Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.

I agree.  I like to expand my horizons in my hobby and my job - It is 
nice when they are so related to each other! :)  For instance I thought 
that when Microchip came out with their 16 bit offerings they were "too 
little, too late".  But with their PIC24 line I've changed my mind.  
Those chips have replaced anything else that I do with a PIC, they are 
so cheap and have so much capability that I reach for them first now.  
ARM has been a constant backbone to embedded high-power stuff that I've 
been working with that too, but not been very happy with the Eclipse 
solutions and will probably go for for Crossworks.  I have some 
experience with IAR and am not all that happy with them, but the 
Crossworks guys have been easy to work with and very responsive, so 
there you go - "perception rules".  So many toys and so little time!!!

DLC

On 11/29/10 11:51 AM, David Kelly wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 08:51:25AM -0800, Philippe Habib wrote:
>    
>> It seems to me that if you've got all the power you need, you're
>> nowhere close to running out of flash and you own and know all of the
>> tools you need to work, you don't have the kind of volume that would
>> pay back the investment in a lower cost or otherwise better solution,
>> why change processors and start all over?
>>      
> One good answer is that if one is only doing embedded work for one's
> amusement then thats good enough excuse to expand one's horizons.
>
> No matter, its always good to have another tool in one's pocket.
>
> As for myself, I read these threads partly to expand horizons, partly
> because I anticipate a future task for which an AVR is inadequate.
>
> In the past when I have looked at ARM solutions many required a good bit
> of hand-holding to come out of RESET. Not all, but some. Having many
> vendors of similar parts is good for competition. But the results are
> not always good.
>
>    

-- 
Dennis Clark
TTT Enterprises

On 29/11/2010 19:05, Dennis Clark wrote:
> I agree.  I like to expand my horizons in my hobby and my job - It is
> nice when they are so related to each other! :)  For instance I thought
> that when Microchip came out with their 16 bit offerings they were "too
> little, too late".  But with their PIC24 line I've changed my mind.
> Those chips have replaced anything else that I do with a PIC, they are
> so cheap and have so much capability that I reach for them first now.
> ARM has been a constant backbone to embedded high-power stuff that I've
> been working with that too, but not been very happy with the Eclipse
> solutions and will probably go for for Crossworks.  I have some
> experience with IAR and am not all that happy with them, but the
> Crossworks guys have been easy to work with and very responsive, so
> there you go - "perception rules".  So many toys and so little time!!!


Tha Rowley JTAG interfaces are very good, as well. I got one of the 
standard ones a long time ago and now use the new Pro unit.

Leon
-- 
Leon Heller
G1HSM

> I have heard a lot of talk about Atmel ARM devices and I figure I 
> should take a good ... I have been very happy with the AVR line and
> it has served me well.  I'm not necessarily looking to switch.

I've also tinkered some with AVR32 in the past few months.  And actually, I am quite impressed.  I really like the processor architecture; it is kind of ARM Cortex-M3 meets MIPS meets AVR.

Too bad it never quite seemed to make main stream.

Greg