PORTLAND, Ore.—Chery Automobile Co. Ltd.—the largest passenger car maker in China—said Tuesday (March 15) that it is going 32-bit with its entire line of vehicles in order to improve their fuel efficiency, emissions and safety. Chery will incorporate Freescale Semiconductor Inc.'s Qorivva 32-bit MPC563x MCUs in its future vehicles.
"Chery developed what it calls the Chery Engine Management System using Freescale’s 16-bit S12XE MCU," said Andy Macleod, marketing and business development manager of Freescale's Microcontroller Solutions Group. "But by moving to the Qorivva MCU, Chery will be able to use the 32-bit Power Architecture to improve the performance of its vehicles, which are expected to reach full production in 2012."
Last year, Freescale announced a joint development lab to develop customized versions of its 32-bit Power Architecture microprocessors or greener, safer turcks with Beiqi Foton Motor Co. Ltd., the biggest commercial vehicle maker in China. Freescale has had a similar joint development lab with Chery in Wuhu, China, since 2008. Now, with China's biggest passenger car maker on-board with 32-bit, the Power Architecture microcontroller has become the dominant automotive processor in China.
According to the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers, China is now the world's largest vehicle market, with 18 million vehicles sold in 2010.
Chery is the leading passenger car maker in China, the world's largest car market.
Yalanand, see my comment above. While implementations vary, advanced timing and control of fuel spark and combustion can significantly reduce fuel and emissions. Engines have become more and more complex (even in emerging markets) in order to meet government emission standards, which has led customers to use 32bit MCU's over 16bit MCU's since 16bit MCU performance could not rival the scalabity and performance advantages 32bit MCU's offer.
While there are still some ECU's in emerging markets using a 16bit MCU, most have already or beginning to convert to 32bit MCU's. Moving from 16bit MCU’s to low-end 32bit MCU’s like MPC563xM can offer a 5-10x increase in performance throughput at similar costs since they begin to converge at small geometries. Combining performance increases with enhanced peripherals like signal processing, FPU, eTPU timers and decimation filters can filter and detect knock signals with more precision and remove external ASICs. Estimates indicate that precise spark timing can improve fuel efficiency and conservatively reduce emissions by more than 10%.
if 16 bit MCU can handle the process then what is the need of 32 bit MCU , i don't think it will increase the speed of operation.....
speed of the processing time depends on the protocol used for communicating with the different parts of vehicle like CAN, LIN, FlexRay etc.
I'm guessing that the real reason for moving to 32 bit processors is that they are now readily available at a competitive price and easily interface with other components. Sticking with older technology eventually starts costing more overall. Marketing then makes an announcement to boast about the change to gain publicity.
I'm usually very skeptical about announcements like this on EETimes but I actually have hands on experience with S12XE microcontrollers and I have to say they are a piece of crap. Going 32bit doesnt just mean greater range for computations, but also a cleaner memory map without the paging hell (for apps bigger than 64k) and quite probably a higher performance per MHz. I can tell you by experience that higher complexity algorithms (like LQ controller) along with the regular safety management and diagnostic features easily eat up the performance budget of the S12XE. Going for the MPC is a good move from Chery, I think the whole automotive segment would benefit from forgetting legacy architectures like the 16bit S12X family.
David Patterson, known for his pioneering research that led to RAID, clusters and more, is part of a team at UC Berkeley that recently made its RISC-V processor architecture an open source hardware offering. We talk with Patterson and one of his colleagues behind the effort about the opportunities they see, what new kinds of designs they hope to enable and what it means for today’s commercial processor giants such as Intel, ARM and Imagination Technologies.