Blog
Comment
Chinlee
For my project, I am using an 8-bit device that is optimized in performance and ...
Blayr
8- to 32-bit MCUs: app use is removing the In-Between
Andreas Eieland, Atmel
7/16/2012 1:27 AM EDT
However, as vendors continue to expand their portfolios, 16-bit options seem to be used less and less. Given that trend, it’s important to outline several clear distinctions and application uses for designers when choosing between 8- bit vs. a 32-bit, as well as outlining how advances in both portfolios have eliminated the need for the 16-bit MCU.
As referenced above, vendors such as Atmel continue to develop broad 8-bit AVR MCU portfolios that deliver 16-bit performance. These 8-bit AVR products include industry-leading low-power features with smart peripherals, security blocks and high-speed features that push the boundaries of 8-bit MCUs.
Many engineers choose to use 8-bit AVR MCUs where they would have previously relied on a 16-bit MCU because the specific applications require an MCU that has scalable system performance with reduced cost, smaller size, greater flash memory and lower power. In fact, many companies today deliver microcontrollers that fulfill historic 16-bit application requirements—standby, sleep for lower power consumption, powerful and efficient peripherals, and smaller footprint – but with an 8-bit microcontroller.
Speaking more broadly, one of the key trends for the 8-bit market has been the integration of a rich peripheral set on the MCU. Previously, these blocks—including USB, LCD control, 12-bit ADC and DAC and other functions—were often all included in external components. Atmel, for instance, has solved this by developing a variety of 8-bit products that allow customers to support a wide range of applications and maximize code re-use and design efficiency.
When discussing larger scale applications, such as automotive, industrial, biometric, audio, communication and Web servers, designers were previously left with a tough decision, as these applications require extremely robust computing performance, but demand low power consumption—constraining designers to rely on 16-bit MCUs in an attempt to satisfy both needs.
However, with the integrated functionality of a deep sleep mode in the latest 32-bit MCU families, and more efficient 32-bit proprietary and ARM CPUs, designers are now able to select a 32-bit MCU and use the additional performance while still reaping the low-power performance and smaller footprint previously associated with 16-bit varieties.
Where just a few years ago, high development tool cost was a barrier to utilizing 32 bit-MCUs, low-cost 32-bit tools have emerged that allow ease-of-entry into the 32-bit workspace. Additionally, 32-bit MCUs also include more memory and interfaces such as high-speed USB for the system designer—creating fewer design barriers and spurring greater adoption.
For both 8- and 32-bit MCUs, power consumption is a key determinant, and that concern has led to greater innovation. Some vendors address the power consumption issue for both 8- and 32-bit markets using the same technology.
For instance, Atmel offers a proprietary low-power technology to address the issue with its picoPower for all 8- and 32-bit MCUs. This technology enables Atmel products to achieve the industry’s lowest power consumption and power-down sleep. These low-power technologies address the concerns of longer battery life and lower power consumption for various applications in ZigBee, power tools, medical, board controllers, networking, metering, optical transceivers, motor control, white goods and any battery-powered products.
Both 8- and 32-bit MCUs have greatly expanded the range of applications they can support—providing designers with greater selection and flexibility. Both markets have grown quickly and encroached into the 16-bit space, but by meeting low power and scalability needs, designers are left with superior choices and clearer delineation of application use.
Andreas Eieland is Senior Product Marketing Manager for Flash Microcontrollers at Atmel. Prior to this position, Mr. Eieland worked as an AVR Product Marketing Manager and Applications Engineer at Atmel’s AVR Products Center. He holds a Master of Science degree from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology.


electronix79
7/19/2012 2:59 PM EDT
I want to left my personal opinion here.
I used many MCU from 2000 until now and I participated in many embedded design contest from 2004.
After Zilog Z80 which I learn in my BSc Electronic degree I move to learn AVR 8bit MCU for my final project implementation. At that time in 2002-2003 AVR 8 bit by my opinion was the best MCU to learn for Assembly and C languages. Today many things has changed and the price for MCU is come probably to the first place for me.
Generally in the past I tried to use the 8bit AVR because I was very excited of how quickly I can do something with it. But day by day new ideas were appears and sometimes I need more speed in MCU and for this reason I turn to ARM MCU family.
I think that is no point to stress the 8bit with something which you can do easy in ARM Cortex 32bit. And also remember the ATMEL 8bit MCU are not very cheap you can find 32bit MCU for example from ST in much better offer with much more peripherals, memory size of Flash and SRAM where you can run even many tasks in freeware RTOS such as CooCox.
But also I want to cover the 8bit projects, I think that Cypress PSoC 8bit family is the best place for this solution. Maybe in some cases AVR 8bit can be used if PSoC 8bit are not possible to cover the implementation but again why not choose then directly 32bit ARM? This is how I am thinking and working.
It was the same story as with the popularity of PIC and then the AVR, but finally the ARM will take the cake for something average to advance approach.
Yes ofcause in ARM 32bit MCU there are many players nowadays and probably half of them I have tried already.
But the criteria for selection of suitable MCU is your decision. My 3 most important factors are price, energy consumption and peripherals.
This shortly was my opinion :)
Sign in to Reply
Blayr
8/1/2012 6:51 AM EDT
To - electronix79
Price, energy consumption and peripherals - Does that mean that the core is not important? What about the ease of use and a convenient easy to handle low cost toolchain?
Sign in to Reply
Chinlee
8/1/2012 4:22 PM EDT
For my project, I am using an 8-bit device that is optimized in performance and cost effective for my project. I believe there are options to select between an 8- and 32-bit MCU. But for my specific project, I feel an 8-bit, with 16-bit performance, meet the requirements for my specification and is easier to use. If I used a 32-bit MCU, it would be more complex, though higher in performance, and would definitely consume more power and time. I think an 8-bit is still the smart choice when designing less complex projects that require just the right price-to-performance ratio.
Sign in to Reply