Any experience with Cygnal processors.

We use the F310 in a couple of designs. Great processor. You will definately get hooked on the speed. The development system is also a treat to work with and the entry price very attractive.

The peripheral crossbar takes some time to get used to, but Cygnal has some good tools to help you configure it for the first time. Once you have configured it and gained some confidence with it, it will become second nature.

We are using the F320 in an application with a USB interface. I bought the development board and all of the tools including a restricted C compiler for $229 (USD). The examples were good and the tools were easy to use. I'm very happy.

Dave Ro> Hello all,

We've done more than a few applications using the '310 and even brought out a 'Gadget' based on that part which permits prototyping with a free Forth, Basic, and assembler development environment:

All in all the Cygnal line has been very error-free and well designed in addition to being inexpensive and powerful. Good choice!

-- Regards, Albert

---------------------------------------------------------------------- AM Research, Inc. The Embedded Systems Experts

(916) 780-7623

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Using an 'F020 on an image processing product (it runs the control panel as well as the FPGA).

I love the processor. The only issues I may have are:

1- The crosbar switch scares me. If, for any reason, you need to change the configuration after having boards made, well, you are out of luck. I think it should have been a full matrix rather than the approach they took. In other words, if I layout a board that does not use the second uart, but, after the prototype is made, decide that I need it, all the signals following the uart pins will shift down the device. You get to respin your board. This is the most unnerving part of using these components. A full matrix would allow you to plop down the chip and deal with the IO later. Peace of mind.

2- I'd love to see some extensions to the basic 8052 architecture. Several DPTR registers would be great, for example. Also something as simple as a DEC DPTR instruction. Maybe they can add a number of these extensions and let you set a config bit to either go "by the book" or use all the enhanced features.

Other than that, the speed is just great. Very nice chips.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Martin Euredjian

To send private email:
0_0_0_0_@pacbell.net
where
"0_0_0_0_"  =  "martineu"




"Gerard"  wrote in message
news:3f93c2a0$0$58699$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
> Hello all,
>
> I'm considering the C8051F310 for a new design, any bad (or good)
> experiences?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Gerard
>
>

We had the same initial fears.

The crossbar is really a mental and not a physical block. Simply pick a set of assignments and stick with it. From that point forward, simply treat the chip as if it is made that way. Then it is like any other chip that once you design it in, you live with. If you chose your initial assignments wisely, you will find out that you actually do have more flexibility than what a hardwired chip would give you.

The more you use the part, the more comfortable you will become with the XBAR. Ultimately, you will come to embrace it.

Thanks, for the replies!

Gerard