Intel 80C32

Okay, at the risk repeating myself. I must warn it may sound a bit like a rant: The reason I don't use 8051s anymore is because I can't use my C software library or any C code snippet I wrote for another platform on it. I found I ended up writing the same software twice. This is caused by the harvard architecture of the device. It has 3 seperate memory areas. C doesn't like that because pointers won't work between memory areas. A real pain in the ass. Another reason is speed. Even though there are 40MHz versions available, the 8051's instruction set is not friendly for a C compiler to work with which results in slow code. Nowadays I've moved to the MSP430 for the small stuff.

What kind of (crap) compiler were you using? Keil supports both generic and memory-specific pointers. Of course using the generic pointers results in slower & larger code but that's the price of portability on that platform. It's certainly not a show stopper.

There are processors that are fast enough for most 8-bit stuff. At 75-100 MIPS some can outrun much larger micros.

Best regards, Spehro Pefhany

Hello Spehro,

But they can't outrun Monsieur L'Inspecteur at the EMC lab ;-)

I am not much of a uC expert but I have to side with Nico here. The MSP430 is slow in clock speed but its 16-bit architecture can run circles around 8-bitters. Downside is single-source and that's a serious downside. No idea why they still hover at 16MHz but people have over-clocked them, big time. Can't be done in a product, of course, but they must have tons of reserves.

Currently I am pounding a 430F2013. In contrast to the old 80C51 that feels almost like stepping from my old Citroen into a new Honda. No more hand cranking...

In article , Joerg wrote: [....]

I'd expect that to only be a small part of the problem. The very sloppy frequency matching and large drift would be a bigger part of it.

The ones from Cygnal use an internal PLL and don't bring signals off chip needlessly. Considering that the 11.0592MHz clock of a standard 8051 has enough 1.2GHz in the edges to make a GPS not work beside it, I don't think "clock speed" is the real issue.

Hello Ken,

I aligned all of them which increased the SNR. But quite often we have to unplug a module for a few seconds and plug it back in to make it respond.

Yup. It sounds like a bad reset or other flaky circuit design.

Hello Ken,

That's exactly the stuff that causes customer unhappiness, a GPS quitting, the TV becoming hazy or the FM station being muted. That's why it can be important to avoid certain bands even if the emissions are below the limits.