Cypress PSoC recommendations

As an aside, I just read that Cypress are changing their 8 bit core to 8051 and will also have a 32bit ARM Cortex M3 version:

Dave.

Forgot to add to my OP.

Are there any significant advantages these have over PIC's?

They have reconfigurable switched-capacitor blocks that can make them useful for a variety of signal processing tasks. They also have a pretty glitzy bit of software to help people program them. If you don't need those, there are a variety of PICs, AVRs, and others that might be more suitable.

Also, they've got reconfigurable logic blocks that can be handy for faster digital stuff. Similar to CPLD. Then a charge pump if run on lowish supplies, and so on. Best to pour a (huge) cup of coffee and saunter through the datasheet of a PSoC. It's like a new car, every few minutes you discover a new button or function that your old one doesn't have :-)

The PSoC-3 is 8051 based and the PSoC-5 is ARM based.

The Cypress guys have been bending my ear over the PSoC-3/5 for about a year now. They released everything this week, but the silicon. :-( I'd love to use it, but their A/D and D/A suck eggs. ...still might use it, but see sentence #2.

Not a bad decision. You can find a 8051 programmer in every town and that uC core has the longevity of a VW Beetle. From all the stuff I repaired around the house that had a uC in there I have a hard time remembering one that was not some sort of 8051.

I've used the PSoC for quite a while now. Nice chip with an attractive blend of analog, digital and microcontroller. But. PSoC 1/2 do have some short commings:

Bad specs for A/D. Analog outputs are very limited range Few specified maximum ratings in the datasheet, a lot of typical numbers No way to debug inside the chip (analog signals) and combined with no spice models in can be difficult to do a complex design Single source component A lot of flash used to swap configurations, which means you need to hard-code them and thats a pain

For the new chip PSoC 3/5, the analog is very much better and the micro speed is up to standard. This I'm sure will be a kick-ass chip. Don't think though that they will be any better wrt the datasheets and simulation models

Regards

Klaus

The PSoC 3/5 is still pretty bad. It seems they didn't think there was a market for even a decent delta-sigma converter.

Still lacking.

That's a given. FPGAs are single source too.

??

I think you're right. :-( They're talking about releasing Verilog tools for the digital parts. I told them I wanted VHDL, which they blew off. ;-)

Thanks for the input.

I've decided to hold off on the PSOC. I'm going to do some more research and see what other micros are available that offer features not on PIC's or enhancements. I also don't want to spend a fortune on programmers and compilers.

I just bought some DDS IC's AD9834 to play with, should keep me busy for a while.

Is there any comparison around to Actel's Fusion FPGAs? They have some analog support and they provide 8051 and Cortex M1 as CPU cores. Would be interesting to know if the analog parts are better or worse than the PSoC...

Actel's processors are soft cores. They cost you a bundle of slices (or whatever Actel calls 'em). An 8051 is ~2500 cells, IIRC. The Actel part I'm designing in now only has 750. 2500 FPGA cells makes a damned expensive 8051.

Configurable Delta-Sigma ADC with 12-bit resolution ? Programmable gain stage: x0.25 to x16 ? 12-bit mode, 192 ksps, 70 dB SNR, 1 bit INL/DNL

FYI

Cheers, John

Crap.