Author Topic: Moving into 32-bit MCU  (Read 17783 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline danadak

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1875
  • Country: us
  • Reactor Operator SSN-583, Retired EE
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #25 on: June 13, 2017, 10:54:16 am »
Cypress PSOC -

For me what stands out is -

1) Routability
2) Fast 12 bit SAR A/D and slow 20 bit DelSig
3) DFB (Digital Filter Block) that is dual channel, handle FIR or IIR filters, or DFB
can be used as a GP fast processor block, similar to RISC block
4) MSI logic elements GUI based and/or the UDB Verilog capability. Eg. the FPGA
like capability
5) Onboard Vref
6) IDAC, VDAC, OpAmps (up to 4), comparator, mixer, switch cap, analog mux....
7) LCD,  COM, UART, I2C, I2S, One Wire, SPI, Parallel, LIN, CAN, BLE, USB
9) Custom components capability, create with schematic capture or Verilog
10) DMA to offload processes like filters, COM, Display
11) ARM M0 (PSOC 4) or M3 (PSOC  5LP) or 8051 core(PSOC 3)
12) Extensive clock generation capabilities
13) All components supported by extensive prewritten APIs

https://www.element14.com/community/thread/23736/l/100-projects-in-100-days?displayFullThread=true

http://www.cypress.com/documentation/code-examples/psoc-345-code-examples

Great video library

Attached component list.  A component is an on chip HW resource.

Free GUI design tool with schematic capture, "Creator". Components have rich API library attached
to each component. Compilers free as well.

PSOC 4 is low end of family, consider 5LP parts as well. PSOC 4 also has arduino footprint boards (pioneer) as well

https://www.elektormagazine.com/labs/robot-build-with-cypress-psoc

http://www.cypress.com/products/32-bit-arm-cortex-m-psoc


An example of digital filter design, operating in background while rest of
PSOC doing other stuff






Dev board for $ 10

https://www.google.com/search?q=psoc+digital+filter+image&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjnrsXU07rUAhVP9GMKHaH_CkkQ7AkIPA&biw=1366&bih=648#tbm=isch&q=psoc+image&imgrc=eguoTYfRItp2TM:

There is also a Pioneer board for $ 25 that has Arduino footprint to take expansion cards, PSOC 4.

Regards, Dana.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2017, 11:00:38 am by danadak »
Love Cypress PSOC, ATTiny, Bit Slice, OpAmps, Oscilloscopes, and Analog Gurus like Pease, Miller, Widlar, Dobkin, obsessed with being an engineer
 
The following users thanked this post: ebclr, blueskull

Offline technix

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3296
  • Country: cn
  • From Shanghai With Love
    • My Untitled Blog
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #26 on: June 13, 2017, 01:09:30 pm »
Sheesh. The PSoC folks are reckless... There are a lot of other options out there folks, often cheaper or better documented and supported, PSoC isn't everything.
 

Online NorthGuy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1947
  • Country: ca
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #27 on: June 13, 2017, 01:57:23 pm »
I looked at the Cypress PSoC website, and seems like they're not that much different from PICs or other MCUs, except for terminology.

"Programmable Routing & Interconnect" instead of "Peripheral pin select"

"Programmable Digital Blocks" instead of "Periphery"

"Programmable Analog Blocks" instead of "Analog periphery"

"CPU Subsystem" instead of just CPU.

Of course, I couldn't go through all the details, but from a glance look, they're just MCUs with bunch of hype around.

Xilinx also have PSoCs, and Xilinx's "Programmable Routing & Interconnect" is something totally different. Perhaps, Cypress think that by using the same words they can promote their products better.
 

Offline Scrts

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 625
  • Country: lt
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #28 on: June 13, 2017, 02:40:26 pm »
MZ is a performance chip. Can run at 250 MHz. It has FPU, DSP and core which can use MicroMips. But, IMHO, the CPU runs faster than periphery can handle. It still has very nice performance features such as 3 MHz ADCs, high speed USB etc.
PIC32MZ even got a MMU onboard and can run full-blown Linux. It is more likely that it would be smarter to use PIC32MZ as a MCU, couple it with some PSRAM and SPI NOR Flash, load U-Boot into the Flash (Microchip should default to this) and launch a Linux kernel from there.

Have you done a blinker on such linux based system? Or SPI connections? Do you have examples?

Because I've tried linux on AT91 and it was a huge learning curve and pain to make it working. Bare metal was plug & play within hours. I did not have linux experience and for most of microcontroller applications - I don't want to learn it.
 

Online Sal Ammoniac

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 972
  • Country: us
    • Embedded Tales Blog
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #29 on: June 13, 2017, 05:10:27 pm »
Why not

Because the ESP32 uses an obscure 32-bit MCU (the Xtensa LX6) with limited development support. The Nordic nRF52 is a much better choice. It also has built-in Bluetooth, but it's based on an industry standard ARM Cortex-M4 microcontroller.
Nothing lasts as long as a workaround.
 

Offline Howardlong

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4821
  • Country: gb
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #30 on: June 13, 2017, 08:30:07 pm »
Sorry for answering so late.
So, I've decided to go for PIC32...
Just have to choose the line. All of them have curiosity boards except for MK...
Which one would you go for?

MX. It's the most mature.

I agree, the MX. The PIC32MX1xx/2xx have a number of advantages, namely:

o Available in DIP28, easy to breadboard
o Doesn't need Harmony framework
o Will work on the 3.3v version of the Microstick you have
o Peripherals often similar to other PICs

(The PIC24FV16KM202 you're using now is a really handy chip, it's my favourite for running directly off Lithium cells, and it has some nice peripherals, particularly PWM.)

 

Offline MAntunes

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 99
  • Country: pt
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #31 on: June 13, 2017, 09:40:55 pm »
Thank you all.
I'm indeed looking at the Microstrick II, that supports PIC32MX, dsPIC33 and PIC24.
I'll look for some cheap new or used board.

Thank you!
 

Offline newbrain

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: se
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #32 on: June 13, 2017, 10:08:56 pm »
I looked at the Cypress PSoC website, and seems like they're not that much different from PICs or other MCUs, except for terminology.
I would not like to sing the praises of Cypress PSoCs too much (I am not their employee or an investor...and we have the resident PSoC expert, danadak), but the list above is a bit superficial, and maybe reading Chapter 7 and 8 of this document could help a better understanding.

Quote
"Programmable Routing & Interconnect" instead of "Peripheral pin select"
Not many MCUs have the complete freedom to assign any peripheral to any pin, though some do, granted.
But most of the ones I know have very limited possibility of internal peripheral interconnection (e.g. you can trigger an ADC from a timer, but rarely you can do the opposite...).
PSoC internal routing allows you complete freedom in arranging the "peripherals" (better: components).

Quote
"Programmable Digital Blocks" instead of "Periphery"
This, I think is the fundamental difference with any other MCU: a complete set of predefined peripherals is available (timers, PWM, I2C, SPI, ADCs and DACs etc. etc.) but one if free to define and design their own.
The internal fabric is similar to an FPGA, admittedly a very small one, and Verilog can be directly used, if desired.
In the graphical editor, all the usual logic (and analog) building blocks can be found: flip-flops, gates, registers, muxes, clocks etc.
In addition to those, higher level design is possible using state machines and direct programming of the UDBs (Universal Digital Blocks).
Some of the default peripherals are implemented in fixed function loginc, other in programmable logic and several in both according to the needed flexibility.

Quote
"Programmable Analog Blocks" instead of "Analog periphery"
Very much what said above holds: op amps, comparators, analogue muxes, DACs and ADCs, references can be freely interconnected and routed to any pin.

Quote
Of course, I couldn't go through all the details
:-// I think that if you read through the chapter mentioned above, you can get a good grasp of how PSoCs differ from the usual MCUs: among the ones I've fiddled with (STM32Fx, NXP lpc43S67, ATmega and ATtiny, TI MSP432, I admit I have an addiction to cheap dev boards  :palm:) I find it pretty unique.

The only gripe I have is that one is bound to their Windows IDE (for the HW schematic entry part, for the SW I mostly use VS Code), but at least is quite decent.

The APIs are simple and clear, and well documented.

Once again: I'm not on crusade to defend or advertise PSoCs, I just find them handy (and the PSoC5LP gum-stick dev board is really cheap  :-+) and it is easy to come up with mixed HW/SW designs (at least for simple needs) using close to zero external components.
Nandemo wa shiranai wa yo, shitteru koto dake.
 

Online NorthGuy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1947
  • Country: ca
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #33 on: June 13, 2017, 11:40:15 pm »
I would not like to sing the praises of Cypress PSoCs too much (I am not their employee or an investor...and we have the resident PSoC expert, danadak), but the list above is a bit superficial, and maybe reading Chapter 7 and 8 of this document could help a better understanding.

Thank you. This is very interesting reading. I like the idea of creating your own peripherals with ULB. I also like the idea of different IO voltages for different pins.

You can actually interconnect stuff in modern PICs too. They even have logic cells which you can configure as logic gates or flip-flops. Timers became quite sophisticated. And you can connect elements. Not freely, but they're getting better and newer ones give more freedom and less restrictions on the interconnect. Of course, it doesn't get even close to building your own peripherals, but these small PICs are 5-10 times cheaper than the PSoC you quoted.

PSoCs are priced close to high end PICs such as new PIC32MZ DA with 32Mbytes of RAM. PSoC's price is also very close to the low end real FPGAs, such as Spartan-6 (and hopefully Spartan-7). Spartans are much better in creating your own peripherals, allow different IO voltages, and can handle speeds nearly 10 times faster than PSoCs.

It is wonderful to watch the enormous diversity of modern MCUs. I hope the vendors will keep it that way.
 

Offline westfw

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3143
  • Country: us
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #34 on: June 14, 2017, 12:31:19 am »
Quote
You can actually interconnect stuff in modern PICs too. They even have logic cells which you can configure as logic gates or flip-flops.
My interpretation is that the PIC CLCs compare to the PSoC Logic blocks about the way a GAL16V8 (simple PLD) would compare to Mach110 (smallish CPLD.)  Except that the CLCs are usually smaller than a GAL16V8, and there tend to be fewer of them on a chip than there are UDBs on a PSoC.

(So I looked into it a bit deeper, and this isn't very close.  But it still might be a useful comparison.  A Microchip CLC might be useful for combining the output from a timer with the output from a serial peripheral to produce a modulated waveform on a pin.  The PSoC UDBs are suitable for building an entirely new "modulated serial output peripheral" that doesn't use the base chip's peripherals...)

(OTOH, the CLCs are easily understandable and probably useful, while the UDBs have a CPLD/FPGA-like learning curve (if you want to go beyond pre-packaged functions.))
 

Offline danadak

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1875
  • Country: us
  • Reactor Operator SSN-583, Retired EE
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #35 on: June 14, 2017, 12:34:33 am »
Adding to what newbrain said -

1) PSOC 5LP family has an internal DSP engine that can function as another
processor, in fact the PSOC 6 family imminent has a true dual processor architecture.
Cortex M0+ and Cortex M4. The DSP engine can be programmed to do some non
standard math or control, or used in its standard config as a digital filter, FIR or IIR,
dual channel, up to 128 taps in FIR.

2) The routing is pretty general, except that the analog has a preferred, not mandatory,
ports. There is a tool to analyze the switch paths in case one wants to deviate from the
norm.

3) User can create custom components (chip functionality) using Verilog or schematic
capture using all the predefined basic logic elements.

4) I am not a PSOC expert, just an active user. There are people on their website supporting
designers that I would classify as knowing a lot more than I do, Bob Marlowe being one. He
is very active over there helping.

5) Recently analog primitives have been added so one can build special analog capability.
I do not know yet how complete that is. But looks interesting. I worked in the field as
an FAE with a number of companies doing dual processor designs, for reliability, non-
stop computing, etc..

6) The on board bandgap ref is +/-  .1%, not too shabby.

7) DMA facility quite good, in terms of triggering, chaining, background operations etc..

8) Dual ADCs, 12 bit SAR + 20 bit DelSig, or dual 12 bit SAR.

9) There are several families, some sub $1, all with various HW resources. Even Bluetooth is
targeted by one family. The high end parts are not cheap, but when fully used very competitive.
All use same tool, PSOC Creator. Free, including compiler.

10) Some people are doing PSOC development on MAC using Parallels. Linux I see activity
on web, at your own risk I gather.

11) Several wizards make life easy setting up components like digital filter, DMA, routing evaluation,
clock system, ADC setup......


Just a few of the good things in a PSOC.


Regards, Dana.

« Last Edit: June 14, 2017, 12:54:52 am by danadak »
Love Cypress PSOC, ATTiny, Bit Slice, OpAmps, Oscilloscopes, and Analog Gurus like Pease, Miller, Widlar, Dobkin, obsessed with being an engineer
 

Offline helius

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2897
  • Country: us
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #36 on: June 14, 2017, 01:26:48 am »
Quote from: NorthGuy
...
PSoC is a trademark proprietary to Cypress. SoC is a general industry term that has been with us for decades. It is like "Phone" vs "iPhone".
Xilinx is not a MCU company, and the Zynq chips are not like typical MCUs. They have no flash memory, for example, and a higher price structure.

The Cypress PSoCs have uncommitted logic arrays. Calling them just another peripheral is very strange and makes me question how much you can possibly know about electronics. This is like calling a 16R4 "just a buffer". It hardly makes any sense at all.
There have been MCUs with built-in programmable logic blocks before, like the discontinued uPSD from WSI/ST and E5 from Triscend/Xilinx.
 

Offline Dave_PT

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 282
  • Country: pt
    • DavidMartinsEngineering
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #37 on: June 14, 2017, 09:13:47 am »
Why not

Because the ESP32 uses an obscure 32-bit MCU (the Xtensa LX6) with limited development support. The Nordic nRF52 is a much better choice. It also has built-in Bluetooth, but it's based on an industry standard ARM Cortex-M4 microcontroller.

And BLE alone is not yet enabled ...
They still have a lot of work to make the SDK usable and reliable.
 

Offline Dave_PT

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 282
  • Country: pt
    • DavidMartinsEngineering
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #38 on: June 14, 2017, 09:23:41 am »
Thank you all.
I'm indeed looking at the Microstrick II, that supports PIC32MX, dsPIC33 and PIC24.
I'll look for some cheap new or used board.

Thank you!

Choose one and learn this one well.
The others are all the same ... more or less peripheral or configuration methods, but the basis is the same.

What matters is working with an MCU and learning what happens behind everything you are doing (low level).
In recent months I have used 3/4 different MCU brands. Besides some settings (as it is perfectly normal) it's pretty much the same thing in all ...
 

Offline ebclr

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2003
  • Country: 00
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #39 on: June 14, 2017, 10:04:30 am »
Do nRF52 runs faster than esp32?  How much 1/100th ?

I guess the topic was performance / dollar

https://blog.classycode.com/esp32-floating-point-performance-6e9f6f567a69
« Last Edit: June 14, 2017, 10:10:48 am by ebclr »
 

Online NorthGuy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1947
  • Country: ca
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #40 on: June 14, 2017, 03:08:46 pm »
9) There are several families, some sub $1, all with various HW resources.

I looked at some PSoCs at the low end. I looked at one for about $1 (PSoC 4000 family), one for about $3 (PSoC 4100 family), one for about $5 (CY8C28xxx). Perhaps I selected wrong ones (there are almost 1000 parts to choose from and it's hard to pick up the good ones without knowing). Unfortunately, none of them have any ULBs. Looks like ULBs can only be found at the high end. Is this correct?
 

Offline danadak

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1875
  • Country: us
  • Reactor Operator SSN-583, Retired EE
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #41 on: June 14, 2017, 05:16:21 pm »
Look at PSOC 3 and PSOC 5LP. Also PSOC 42xx series. All have
UDBs.

If you open Creator, do a scratch project, there is a device selector wizard
that shows all parts, families, capabilities, and is filterable.

"Project", "Device Selector" from main menu.


Regards, Dana.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2017, 05:21:30 pm by danadak »
Love Cypress PSOC, ATTiny, Bit Slice, OpAmps, Oscilloscopes, and Analog Gurus like Pease, Miller, Widlar, Dobkin, obsessed with being an engineer
 

Online NorthGuy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1947
  • Country: ca
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #42 on: June 14, 2017, 07:48:57 pm »
Look at PSOC 3 and PSOC 5LP. Also PSOC 42xx series. All have
UDBs.

Found some 42xx with UDBs for about $5. Do you know if there's any document which would describe the structure of the UDB in details?
 

Offline newbrain

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: se
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #43 on: June 14, 2017, 08:27:19 pm »
Look at PSOC 3 and PSOC 5LP. Also PSOC 42xx series. All have
UDBs.

Found some 42xx with UDBs for about $5. Do you know if there's any document which would describe the structure of the UDB in details?
Welcome to the cult!  :clap:
We'll meet under the cypress tree after sunset.
Danadak will officiate.
All hail the PSoC! :-DD

Sorry...on a more serious note:

This is the technical reference manual for the PSoC5 LP, section E describes the architecture of UDBs and macrocells.

I see you are interested in the 4200, here is its TRM, section D16.

An application note for designing UDB based components.
Nandemo wa shiranai wa yo, shitteru koto dake.
 

Offline danadak

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1875
  • Country: us
  • Reactor Operator SSN-583, Retired EE
Love Cypress PSOC, ATTiny, Bit Slice, OpAmps, Oscilloscopes, and Analog Gurus like Pease, Miller, Widlar, Dobkin, obsessed with being an engineer
 

Offline macboy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2007
  • Country: ca
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #45 on: June 15, 2017, 02:43:38 pm »
Look at PSOC 3 and PSOC 5LP. Also PSOC 42xx series. All have
UDBs.

Found some 42xx with UDBs for about $5. Do you know if there's any document which would describe the structure of the UDB in details?

The CY8C4245AXI-483 has 4 UDB blocks and is ~$2.50 (USD) in singles.  This is the same chip as on the CY8CKIT-049-42XX which is a $4 gumstick size dev board that can be use used on a DIP breadboard, and has USB interface for programming, debugging, and UART communications.

To play with PSoC 5, try the CY8CKIT-059. At $10, it costs far less than the single qty of the PSoC 5LP chip that it has on-board. And it uses another lesser PSoC 5 for its USB programming/debugging interface. The PSoC 5LP chip seems expensive unless you need some of the advanced capabilities (20 bit ADC, DSP, UDBs, etc.), in which case it might be a bargain. If you are just looking for a 32 bit MCU with a bunch of ordinary boring digital peripherals then this is a poor choice.
 

Online NorthGuy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1947
  • Country: ca
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #46 on: June 15, 2017, 03:21:29 pm »
This is the technical reference manual for the PSoC5 LP, section E describes the architecture of UDBs and macrocells.

I see you are interested in the 4200, here is its TRM, section D16.

An application note for designing UDB based components.

Thank you.

Looks like pure logic resources of UDB are minimal. The most configurability comes from the biggest UDB element which they call "Datapath". It has two small FIFOs and a special kind of CPU in between. It only has space for 8 instructions and PC doesn't increment as it does in normal PC. The PC is rather selected by the associated logic, which allows all sorts of sequencing. The datapath's CPU can do shifts which is handy if you want to do some sort of SERDES, or it can add/subtract which can be used for different sorts of counters/PWM etc. The datapath is a very clever solution which allows creating different sort of customizable peripheral. I like the idea. But it is far from fully programmable logic.
 

Offline macboy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2007
  • Country: ca
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #47 on: June 15, 2017, 04:09:00 pm »
This is the technical reference manual for the PSoC5 LP, section E describes the architecture of UDBs and macrocells.

I see you are interested in the 4200, here is its TRM, section D16.

An application note for designing UDB based components.

Thank you.

Looks like pure logic resources of UDB are minimal. The most configurability comes from the biggest UDB element which they call "Datapath". It has two small FIFOs and a special kind of CPU in between. It only has space for 8 instructions and PC doesn't increment as it does in normal PC. The PC is rather selected by the associated logic, which allows all sorts of sequencing. The datapath's CPU can do shifts which is handy if you want to do some sort of SERDES, or it can add/subtract which can be used for different sorts of counters/PWM etc. The datapath is a very clever solution which allows creating different sort of customizable peripheral. I like the idea. But it is far from fully programmable logic.
You've been confused by incomplete information. The "Datapath" is only part of the UDB. The PLD portion is another. This is a fully programmable digital logic block akin to a CPLD. It can be programmed using a graphical tool or by using Verilog directly. You need to look at AN82250 as well as the above linked file which talks only about the datapath portion.
 

Offline danadak

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1875
  • Country: us
  • Reactor Operator SSN-583, Retired EE
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #48 on: June 15, 2017, 05:04:28 pm »
By the way, the $ 10 dev board  CY8CKIT-059 is actually a dual PSOC 5LP processor board,
one used for debug programming, the other the target. So you can actually do a dual design
and program each of them for different functional use. There are limitations on the available I/O
on the snap off debug/programming board, but still you get quite a lot of horsepower with
the 2 processors.




Regards, Dana.
Love Cypress PSOC, ATTiny, Bit Slice, OpAmps, Oscilloscopes, and Analog Gurus like Pease, Miller, Widlar, Dobkin, obsessed with being an engineer
 

Offline danadak

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1875
  • Country: us
  • Reactor Operator SSN-583, Retired EE
Re: Moving into 32-bit MCU
« Reply #49 on: June 15, 2017, 05:19:52 pm »
NorthGuy :

Quote
You can actually interconnect stuff in modern PICs too. They even have logic cells which you can configure as logic gates or flip-flops. Timers became quite sophisticated. And you can connect elements. Not freely, but they're getting better and newer ones give more freedom and less restrictions on the interconnect. Of course, it doesn't get even close to building your own peripherals, but these small PICs are 5-10 times cheaper than the PSoC you quoted.

Not true in general, the prices range from < $ 1 into mid teens, and that's not high volume designs.
Attached is 1 KU talk to nobody pricing.

Quote
PSoCs are priced close to high end PICs such as new PIC32MZ DA with 32Mbytes of RAM. PSoC's price is also very close to the low end real FPGAs, such as Spartan-6 (and hopefully Spartan-7). Spartans are much better in creating your own peripherals, allow different IO voltages, and can handle speeds nearly 10 times faster than PSoCs.

For sure, FPGAs are more general, with one significant limitation, analog is sparse. They have many advantages,
I am looking at a design that will take both a PSOC and an FPGA, because FPGA can give me very high speed
wide counters in the 100 Mhz area. But all the other stuff I need to do much more easily realized on the PSOC.


Regards, Dana.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2017, 05:21:34 pm by danadak »
Love Cypress PSOC, ATTiny, Bit Slice, OpAmps, Oscilloscopes, and Analog Gurus like Pease, Miller, Widlar, Dobkin, obsessed with being an engineer
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf