1. Home
  2. Embedded Programming
  3. Rabbit Alternative

Rabbit Alternative

We currently use an RCM3200 in our main product line. It's a great chip for what we're doing with it, except that it's soon going to be not fast enough at 40MHz.

Can anyone recommend a suitable, faster, alternative to it?

The key features that we need are:

At least 2, preferably 3 or more serial ports. At least 10 general purpose I/O pins, 26 or more would be the bee's knees. At least 1 pwm output, preferably 2 or more programmable pwm like the rabbit. Ethernet port with a UDP/IP stack.

500KB data store (flash, ram, it's not stored between sessions so I don't care) Enough program flash space for the UDP/IP stack and a simple tftp application.

The programming environment is less important to me. It does, however, need to be usable for a 2-man development team (I'm software, my boss makes the hardware). Price per unit, anything under $200 is fine -- more than that and it would just take some evaluation to determine the advantage of the product to see if it's worth it.

The key that we're needing is SPEED.

Thank you for any suggestions you've got.

Alex McHale

Reply to
alexmchale
Loading thread data ...

You might look at Netburner's stuff. I used the MOD5282 at a PPOE.

60-some MHZ Coldfire, gcc environment, pretty good support. Probably not as cheap as Rabbit. I needed CAN bus, some of their other modules might be cheaper and fit your needs better.

Good luck, -=Dave

--
Change is inevitable, progress is not.
Reply to
Dave Hansen

The TMS320F2812 was doing fine there until you got to the Ethernet port

-- could you do that externally? There may be other TI DSP chips (or perhaps an Analog Devices BlackFin) that would do.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Posting from Google?  See http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/
Reply to
Tim Wescott

Our MOD5270 meets all of your requirements

The list prices is $59.00 in thousands.

See:

formatting link

We have had a lot of customers switching from Rabbit and they seem happy with the result.

Paul Breed CTO NetBurner.

Reply to
pbreed

You could ask them about the Rabbit4000, as a first step ? That would be the easiest upgrade path.

If they don't have a comming module fast enough, then you could look at the ROMLESS ARM9's : the Philips LPC3180, and Atmel AT91SAM9260 are going to give a module that is enough of a step up to bother with.

-jg

Reply to
Jim Granville

You should probably consider moving to an ARM.

Ian

Reply to
Ian Bell

Personally, after watching Rabbit's track record with the 2000 and their early core modules and compiler I'm happy to wait a while before jumping on the new one.

Kelly

Reply to
Kelly Hall

Just wondered what exactly your application is. I'd have thought that the RCM3200 would run a simple TFTP application without even having to get out of bed.

If you want lots of I/O why not just add on whats needed using I2C?

If speed is the issue, then try to determine whereabouts in your system any bottlenecks can occur. Are your files stored in some slow flash using an inefficient system?

Maybe write your own file system instead of using the ones supplied by Rabbit. We did that, essentially using a linked list for storage. Very simple with low code overheads.

Do you store any data in the userblock area? This can be slow, particularly as it is mirrored. Any data writes take twice the amount of time that they should do. Convert the userblock type from 4 to 2 which gets rid of the mirrored system. Any writes will now take half the time as before.

Have another look at your existing product and see what you can do. Perhaps it is better than moving to new hardware, new software and new bugs.

Hope that helps :)

Reply to
Rob

Alex,

What operation is pushing you over the top with your current platform?

To Rob's point, take a look at your major consumers of resources and see if there's a better approach - what are the major suspects? (I'd think long and hard before uprooting a working system; optimizing is usually much more appealing.)

Richard

Reply to
Richard H.

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.