Design Con 2015
Breaking News
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 3 / 3
KaiserSoze
User Rank
Rookie
re: Who has the lowest power MCU?
KaiserSoze   4/13/2012 8:00:48 AM
NO RATINGS
I note only this detail: to win over the MSP430, Microchip take the sleep/standby current of one item(PIC 24FJ12 etc, 16-bit), and the Active current of one other Item (PIC16LF etc, 8-bit). It seem to me a non-correct method of comparison. It would be the same if TI proposed the best data taking them from several devices, taking the best from where TI have convenience (but TI doesn't acts so). I think that these tricks aren't honourable for a big firm as Microchip. As PM EDT, I don't work for any of two rival.

Jason.Tollefson
User Rank
Rookie
re: Who has the lowest power MCU?
Jason.Tollefson   4/12/2012 11:08:48 PM
NO RATINGS
XORBIT, Thanks for your comments regarding Microchip’s PIC® MCUs, and you are correct that newer parts are much lower power than prior parts. For Sleep modes, Microchip offers up to three; Sleep, Low Voltage Sleep, and Deep Sleep. In every mode, PIC MCUs with eXtreme Low Power (XLP) Technology have multiple methods for waking from sleep, such as an RTC, a Watchdog Timer, Timers, and Interrupts. Regarding work done per clock cycle, I would ask you to examine the number of instruction cycles listed in the MSP430 User Guide, SLAU056G, Page 3-71. Depending on the type of memory addressed, the instruction can be up to 6 cycles for a single instruction. By contrast, 90% of PIC24F instructions are 1 cycle, which is 2 clocks. We tested this with the following C-code, which merely copies 32 bytes from one memory location to another: Sleep(); LATBbits.LATB2 = 1; memcpy(testArr1,testArr2,sizeof(testArr1)); LATBbits.LATB2 = 0; At 4 MHz, this resulted in an execution time of 32 µs for PIC24F, and 80 µs for MSP430. The resultant energy saved by the PIC24F over the MSP430 is 2X! We also ran side by side comparisons of PIC24F and MSP430 using industry-standard benchmarks and found that PIC24F executes code 1.5 to 5 times faster at a given frequency. I would ask you to take a second look at Microchip’s PIC MCUs with XLP Technology and reevaluate our performance in a real-world example. I think you may find that Microchip looks a lot better than you first thought. Disclaimer: I work for Microchip Technology Incorporated, which is committed to delivering outstanding value in low-power MCUs. -Jason Tollefson, 16-bit Microcontroller Senior Product Marketing Manager, Microchip Technology Inc.

t.alex
User Rank
Rookie
re: Who has the lowest power MCU?
t.alex   4/12/2012 10:50:12 PM
NO RATINGS
Benchmarking like this is quite subjective and it is quite difficult to get a fair result. People typically look at the overall system/product rather than just the MCU.

xorbit
User Rank
Rookie
re: Who has the lowest power MCU?
xorbit   4/12/2012 6:44:44 PM
NO RATINGS
I don't know if this is still the case with newer parts, but it has been my experience in the past that Microchip parts looked good on paper, but sorely lacked when it came to actual real-world use. For instance, they would brag about ultra low power, but the only way to wake up the part would be to reset it. There were other things like that. Also, uA/MHz is an irrelevant number when comparing PICs with MSP430s. PIC is the Pentium 4 of microcontrollers: it gets very little done per clock cycle. So it needs to run at much higher MHz to get the same amount of processing done as the extremely efficient MSP430 architecture. A comparison in uA/DMIPS, taking the difference in DMIPS/MHz into account when running real code, would be much more useful for real-world comparisons. I can guarantee the picture would not look pretty for Microchip. Disclaimer: I do not work for either Microchip or TI, but I've compared the architectures in the past.

<<   <   Page 3 / 3


Most Recent Comments
perl_geek
 
AZskibum
 
AZskibum
 
AZskibum
 
AZskibum
 
mhrackin
 
DrQuine
 
R_Colin_Johnson
 
R_Colin_Johnson
Flash Poll
Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
Max Maxfield

Book Review: Deadly Odds by Allen Wyler
Max Maxfield
11 comments
Generally speaking, when it comes to settling down with a good book, I tend to gravitate towards science fiction and science fantasy. Having said this, I do spend a lot of time reading ...

Martin Rowe

No 2014 Punkin Chunkin, What Will You Do?
Martin Rowe
1 Comment
American Thanksgiving is next week, and while some people watch (American) football all day, the real competition on TV has become Punkin Chunkin. But there will be no Punkin Chunkin on TV ...

Rich Quinnell

Making the Grade in Industrial Design
Rich Quinnell
14 comments
As every developer knows, there are the paper specifications for a product design, and then there are the real requirements. The paper specs are dry, bland, and rigidly numeric, making ...

Martin Rowe

Book Review: Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design
Martin Rowe
1 Comment
Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design, Third Edition, by Michel Mardiguian. Contributions by Donald L. Sweeney and Roger Swanberg. List price: $89.99 (e-book), $119 (hardcover).