Which chipset to start?

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
I worked on 8048/8051/8096 about 20 years before. Since then I have
not worked on any microcontroller(But I did a lot on Windows device
driver, C/C++/C# programming recently). Recently, I try to catch up by
looking for what chipset I need to start with. The chipset I like to
start with will be:

1. kind of "8051" like - what I mean is that it will have LONG
life(8051 have exsisted more than 20 years and still kicking!).

2. Easy to get (from online like Digi-Key or retailers for small
quantity).

3. Easy to find interface chip (USB, Internet chip, etc.) and easy to
integrated with the interface chips.

4. Widely industry use - not just for learning.

5. Easy to get help - books, online discussion group, source code
library, good vendor supports, etc.

6. low price develop tools (for home learning).

Any advice / recommendation?

Thanks.

Re: Which chipset to start?
yqin snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com (yong) wrote in

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The 8051 is still very popular with many variants available. Why not stick
with it?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Given so many different vendors of 8051's, I'd bet you could them easily.
Digi-key carries both Atmel and Cygal 8051's. The Cygnal 8051's even have
JTAG program and debug built in.
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yup, 8051's.
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yup, 8051's.


Yup, 8051's.
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yup, 8051's. Cygnal has a $99 eval. kit.
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Stick with what you know. 8051's should be around for a long time to come.

--
- Mark ->
--

Re: Which chipset to start?
I heard of ARM which seems very popular in 32 bit area. Which ARM
processor is most popular?

One posting said AVR is better than 8051 in most case and also easy to
use high level C language programming.

I know assembly language is effcient but C code is easier to maintain
and develop.

Does 8051 has free c compiler?

Re: Which chipset to start?
yqin snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com (yong) wrote in

Quoted text here. Click to load it

ARMs are nice but much more complicated than 8051s, PICs, or AVRs. For
small control applications the 8-bitters are just fine.
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

It's more suited for C since it has the notion of a stack. PICs only have
a hardware return address stack and 8051s only have a max. of 248 bytes of
pushable stack.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Today's mature 8051 C compilers can generate very efficient code at the
project level.
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yes, I SDCC is free and supports the 8051.

http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/

--
- Mark ->
--

Re: Which chipset to start?
Is there any 8051 which has TCP/IP embedded on the chip? I want to
build a system (for learning purpose) which can be controlled by
Internet or which can publish data via internet.

Re: Which chipset to start?
Quoted text here. Click to load it

No and yes... That is no 8051 chip with TCP'/IP embedded within it but
there is a HW tcp/IP chip that is used with 8051's . there is also an
8051 stack that is available (free) with some 78051 parts.

These come from Atmel with the FREE SW stack or HW TCP/IP  chip  which
will cost money


/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England    /\/\/\/\/\
/\/\/ snipped-for-privacy@phaedsys.org       www.phaedsys.org \/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Re: Which chipset to start?
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 20:43:01 +0000, the renowned Chris Hills

Quoted text here. Click to load it

http://pdfserv.maxim-ic.com/en/ds/DS80C400.pdf

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward"
snipped-for-privacy@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Which chipset to start?
Quoted text here. Click to load it

 Hynix have a 20 pin 80C51 ROM device with TCP/IP on chip, but
more suitable for learning purposes would be the TINI
boards using Dallas 80C390/80C400 devices (now Maxim).
-jg

Re: Which chipset to start?
Quoted text here. Click to load it

You maybe should look at the ARM processors. Plenty of vendors out there.
Atmels AVR can generally do most things better than the 8051.



Quoted text here. Click to load it




--
Best Regards
Ulf at atmel dot com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Which chipset to start?
As Mark said, why not get back into the swing of things with the 8051? Play
catch-up on the new features (peripherals) without having to learn a whole new
instruction set.

After that, you can branch out to others like PIC, AVR, MSP430, ARM.


Re: Which chipset to start?
What is the annual sale for PIC and AVR? Is AVR catching up or the
market still in favor of PIC?

Re: Which chipset to start?
yqin snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com (yong) wrote in

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I thought the market was still in favor of 8051.

--
- Mark ->
--

Re: Which chipset to start?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Microchip now commands the most marketshare for 8 bit processors
(previously Motorola).

AVRs and PICs are quite similar. Both are well accepted. I would pick one
family and learn to use it well. You probably won't benefit from using
devices from both companies.

8051 processors are certainly popular but are not really PIC/AVR
substitutes.

--
Al Clark
Danville Signal Processing, Inc.
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Which chipset to start?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

If you constrain by company, okay. But I believe, maybe falsely, that 8051
cores (by all mfgrs) out ship PIC cores.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

No, I'd say PICs are more like 8051s than AVRs. AVRs were designed for use
with high level languages. PICs and 8051s provide banked registers an
low-latency interrupt processing.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

In what regards? I can usually do the job with either PIC or 8051, very
few cases require the PICs super efficient clocks/instruction cycle. Even
there the Cygnal 8051s are almost one clock per instruction.

--
- Mark ->
--

Re: Which chipset to start?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Its been awhile since I used 8051 products but here gopes.

I use PICs almost exclusively as programmable peripherals. They take
virtually no extra parts and come in packages as small as 8 pins. When I
look at AVRs, my impression is that they can fill the same applications
for about the same price, form factor, etc.

You don't want to write a large program in a PIC. When you run out of
memory you're done. 8051 products can use external memory to expand.

I find that I often have a limitation based on processing speed of a PIC
in spite of their "efficient" clock instruction cycle. Maybe this is due
to the fact that I use them as peripherals with DSPs.

I agree that PICs and 8051s are not C friendly. I have no experience with
AVRs. All the 8051 apps that I did many years ago were not speed critical
and I used C because memory was generally abundant.

PICs use the easiest assembly language, I ever learned. There are only 30
something instructions, 1 accumulator and originally 1 pointer register.
I programmed my first PIC in 1/2 day including learning the assembly
language.

You may be right that 8051 from all manufacturers out sell PICs (even if
you don't count USB cores).



--
Al Clark
Danville Signal Processing, Inc.
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Which chipset to start?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

    The 8051 family is still the #1 8-bit micro for a number of reasons, not
just that it is multi-sourced by a very wide variety of vendors on most
continents.
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

    In concept, not in detail, true.
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

    Uhm, I don't think the question was whether an 8051 is a substitute for a
pic/avr.  The 8051 has a number of advantages over either risc
microcontroller and has never been considered a 'substitute'.  Comparing
RISC vs. CISC is a long, drawn-out discussion entirely dependent upon
application.  Quite different tools for quite different applications.  Do
you like apples or oranges?
 
-- Regards, Albert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
AM Research, Inc.                  The Embedded Systems Experts
http://www.amresearch.com (916) 780-7623
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Re: Which chipset to start?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Might be true for the USA but not the rest of the world.

Ian


Re: Which chipset to start?
Quoted text here. Click to load it


 Sounds like the 8051 to me -  (I'd drop the 8048 and 8096 though :)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

 There are many 80C51's with these on one chip.

 80C51's would dominate the FLASH or RAM code USB devices.
 Cygnal, STm and Atmel have FLASH 80C51+USB.
 Cypress and TI have RAM-download 80C51 models.
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

 If you want high performance ADCs+uC, there is only ONE core
to choose from.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

 80C51 series

Al Clark wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

 Microchip have 'bragging rights' to largest unit shipment, with an
average selling price of close to $1.
 That indicates which 'end' of the 8 bit sandpit they play at.

 Motorola's revenues are well above Microchip's, and their
very low PIC ASP shows how little uptake their higher end
devices actually have.

 Total 80C51 annual revenues are well ahead of PIC, and any
other 8 bit uC family.

 6 of the top 10 Semi companies in the world offer 80C51 variants !

 - jg

Site Timeline