Searching \ for '[EE] packaging of 32bit CPUs...' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=packaging+32bit
Search entire site for: 'packaging of 32bit CPUs...'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[EE] packaging of 32bit CPUs...'
2011\02\18@054249 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face
There is all this hype at the moment about 32bit CPUs replacing 8bit  cpus, as the cost of the CPU and memory goes down to 8bit levels, and  chip manufacturers target the market.

NXP in particular has the LPC1102, an ARM Cortex M0 with 16 pins, 32K  of flash, 8K of RAM, and the usual set of 8bit-like features, and a  more-or less 8bit price.

HOWEVER, this thing comes in a WLCSP Package (Wafer Level Chip Scale  Package), which is essentially a 4x4 Ball Grid Array with 0.5mm  spacing.  Not hobbyist friendly at all :-(

Now, while I myself am primarily a hobbyist when it comes to building  hardware, it has always been my perception that there are a large  number of "real companies" out there making "real products" that are  never-the-less not in an economic position to commit the sort of  resources needed to create a design based on such a part (4-layer  extra fine-pitch PCB and probably outsourced assembly), especially  during initial development.  And for that matter aren't really  creating boards in high enough volumes to justify that sort of  manufacturing for their final product, either.  In other words, a lot  of the remaining 8bit applications exist no so much because there  isn't a more powerful 32bit replacement, but because the 8bit cpus  remain much cheaper and easier to "develop and manufacture, for some  large classes of products, compared to the more modern wonder-chips.

In other words, the LPC1102 ought to be doomed to failure.

Am I completely off base here?  Has the sort of PCB technology needed,  and the automated manufacturing, become so available that the initial  "hand assembly" phases is completely gone?  (This is certainly true at  my real job, where I (nominally) write software for boards with many  layers and many chips that cost big $$$$$ and have very long design  cycles...  We've got rework techs and even an Xray machine for looking  at those BGA joints, but they're all for adjusting things AFTER the  boards come back fully manufactured.)  Are the "small businesses"  doing micro-based product design beyond the "we build the first few by  hand, perhaps painfully" or not?  Are there limits on manufacturing  technology used by/for that class of company, or is that a thing of  the past?

Thanks
Bill W

2011\02\18@061458 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> HOWEVER, this thing comes in a WLCSP Package (Wafer Level Chip Scale
> Package), which is essentially a 4x4 Ball Grid Array with 0.5mm
> spacing.  Not hobbyist friendly at all :-(

There are other LPC110x chips that are within serious-hobbyist and small-scale-professional friendly packages.

Otherwise, wait for the 'serious' companies to make breakoutboards with the chip on it. Or check something like http://www.embeddedartists.com/products/boards/lpc1343_qsb.php : E 15.00, LPC1343, which has USB mass-storage emulation *with can be used to download the firmware! who needs a programmer?* Does a compareable 18F PIC (32Kb flash, 8 Kb RAM) even exist?

--
Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

2011\02\18@071408 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 6:42 PM, William "Chops" Westfield
<spam_OUTwestfwTakeThisOuTspammac.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

I think you are. The LPC1102 is just one particular member
of the NXP Cortex M0 product (which is touted to be
the 8-bit killer) and the small size will definitely be of
some advantages in many applications.

Space constraint is actually one of the main challenges
that many applications are facing. Together with low
cost, I think it actually can expected to do well even
though it may not be suitable for hobbyists.

On the other hand, 8-bit MCUs will still be there, so does
16bit MCUs.



-- Xiaofan

2011\02\18@081436 by Walter Banks

picon face


William \"Chops\" Westfield wrote:

{Quote hidden}

It took a long time for any company to find a market for the Cortex M0
for most of the reasons that you have outlined. NXP has been the first to
identify a market where they think Cortex M0 can be applied.

The death of 8 bit micros has been announced many times in the last
decade. The very fact that companies like Microchip are still doing
fundament development on 8 bit micros suggests that these premature
announcements are far from over. The extended mid range parts are
a good example of this. The additional instructions, linear memory,
additional index register and modernized memory management and
better implementation all make this part family competitive for
some time. This is a recent investment.

You have raised some important points. There is always been a
market for small run specialized applications using the unique
technology of small companies. These companies don't have the
resources to put the tools in place for multi thousand piece product.
Probably what is more important is setup costs are going to dictate
that for small run products a solution that is lower tech will probably
cost less and be more effective.

History is on our side on this. One of the earliest tool sets we
developed was for a special purpose 4 bit processor. 31 years
later it is still in production.

We are betting that 8 bit micros will be alive for some time.

Regards,


w..
--
Walter Banks
Byte Craft Limited
http://www.bytecraft.com


2011\02\18@085258 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Wouter van Ooijen <.....wouterKILLspamspam@spam@voti.nl> wrote:
>> HOWEVER, this thing comes in a WLCSP Package (Wafer Level Chip Scale
>> Package), which is essentially a 4x4 Ball Grid Array with 0.5mm
>> spacing.  Not hobbyist friendly at all :-(
>
> There are other LPC110x chips that are within serious-hobbyist and
> small-scale-professional friendly packages.
>
> Otherwise, wait for the 'serious' companies to make breakoutboards with
> the chip on it. Or check something like
> http://www.embeddedartists.com/products/boards/lpc1343_qsb.php : E
> 15.00, LPC1343, which has USB mass-storage emulation *with can be used
> to download the firmware! who needs a programmer?* Does a compareable
> 18F PIC (32Kb flash, 8 Kb RAM) even exist?
>


I think the LPCXpresso can be used for hobbyist to work on LPC1xxx.
It has some limitations but may be good for a lot of hobbyists. Windows
and Linux are both supported.
http://ics.nxp.com/lpcxpresso/



-- Xiaofan

2011\02\18@085640 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
'William Chops" Westfield ' <westfwspamKILLspammac.com wrote:
> Now, while I myself am primarily a hobbyist when it comes to building
> hardware, it has always been my perception that there are a large
> number of "real companies" out there making "real products" that are
> never-the-less not in an economic position to commit the sort of
> resources needed to create a design based on such a part (4-layer
> extra fine-pitch PCB and probably outsourced assembly), especially
> during initial development.

There are surprisingly many small companies that sortof do something
electronic related and are stuck in the stone age.  There are even some
larger companies where electronic thingies that may go with their mechanical
products are more a afterthought and they do things the old fashioned way
because they are somewhat scared of things electronic (I was visiting one of
those just yesterday).

However, there is no need for any of this.  There is a well supplied and
diverse market for assembly services.  You just have to be comfortable with
the process and know how to interface with these suppliers.  Some of these
companies will be more high end and invest in the machines and techniques to
build the latest boards.  In other words, you don't need to have this
expertise since you can hire it out when needed.  The number of small
electronic assembly shops near you will likely surprise you if you ever dig
around and really look for them.  In my area (30 miles northwest of Boston
Massachusetts), there are probably a dozen close enough I could visit in a
single day if I really needed to.  We have everything from one that
specializes to hand work only, to some hand work with a old pick and place
and oven, to fully automated capable of dealing with the latest technology.

It's rare that we build our own prototypes, even when the parts are within
our capability.  We have soldering irons and a hot air station, and can do
down to QFN PICs if need be.  However, all this is labor intensive, and it
makes more sense to pay a local company $35-$50/hour for assembly services
than to pay a engineer to do the same thing that could be doing billable
work at $125/hour.  Also, it's just boring and annoying to build stuff.  I'd
rather be designing the next thing, then get back to debugging the previous
boards when they come back from the manufacturer.

So the short answer is that anyone can have access to advanced assembly
technologies, including small companies.  We typically pay $80 to $200 per
board to get prototypes assembled in small quantities.  Often it's just 2 or
3 boards.  These are to test and debug with, and have a extra or two to
compare in case things don't work right or you blow up something.

For production volumes starting at 100 units or so, we send things out to
where assembly is much lower cost.  Djula is usually the top of the list for
this, although sometimes customers have specific vendors they want to work
with.  Let the folks like Djula invest in the fancy machines for the latest
production technologies.  They have the volume and can keep the machine
busy.  You pay for just a little slice of that when you need it.  This is a
world market (Djula is in Serbia, for example).  There is plenty of
competition so you can get access to high end manfucturing when you need it
at a fair price.

For the vast majority of electronic products, it makes no sense to do the
actual production yourself.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2011\02\18@094642 by alan.b.pearce

face picon face
> NXP in particular has the LPC1102, an ARM Cortex M0 with 16 pins, 32K
> of flash, 8K of RAM, and the usual set of 8bit-like features, and a
> more-or less 8bit price.
>
> HOWEVER, this thing comes in a WLCSP Package (Wafer Level Chip Scale
> Package), which is essentially a 4x4 Ball Grid Array with 0.5mm
> spacing.  Not hobbyist friendly at all :-(
>
> Now, while I myself am primarily a hobbyist when it comes to building
> hardware, it has always been my perception that there are a large
> number of "real companies" out there making "real products" that are
> never-the-less not in an economic position to commit the sort of
> resources needed to create a design based on such a part (4-layer
> extra fine-pitch PCB and probably outsourced assembly), especially
> during initial development.  And for that matter aren't really
> creating boards in high enough volumes to justify that sort of
> manufacturing for their final product, either

Having spent the last 2 days at a manufacturing show here in the UK, I was surprised by the number of PCB manufacturers, assembly houses and so on touting for business. Many of the assembly houses would take your schematic and deliver a box containing the result, if that was how you wanted to work. A one off wasn't out of the question either. One I spoke to wasn't interested in doing larger than about 2500 units at a time, but would do one off quite happily.

I suspect the situation isn't that different stateside if one went out looking.

So for anyone really wishing to do a one off development board to get a product to reproducible stage probably wouldn't need to look too far, even if they only went as far as designing the board layout. I would be really surprised if these companies cannot produce a one off in a manner that would not be too dissimilar economically to doing it in house.
-- Scanned by iCritical.

2011\02\18@105851 by Mark Rages

face picon face
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 8:46 AM,  <.....alan.b.pearceKILLspamspam.....stfc.ac.uk> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

But like everything, there is a cost/benefit analysis to be made.  The
tiniest package is do-able with the help of an outside assembler, but
for many industries there is no advantage to doing so, and some clear
disadvantages.  Debugging and rework is harder, for example, and the
range of assemblers is limited to those running the latest equipment.

It's like using 4/4 design rules on a PCB layout.  When you need to,
you need to, but otherwise I try to design so the cheapest assembly
shop in China can build the product and it will work.

Regards,
Mark
-- Mark Rages, Engineer
Midwest Telecine LLC
EraseMEmarkragesspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTmidwesttelecine.com

2011\02\23@093651 by M.L.

flavicon
face
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 6:14 AM, Wouter van Ooijen <wouterspamspam_OUTvoti.nl> wrote:
>
> Otherwise, wait for the 'serious' companies to make breakoutboards with
> the chip on it. Or check something like
> http://www.embeddedartists.com/products/boards/lpc1343_qsb.php : E
> 15.00, LPC1343, which has USB mass-storage emulation *with can be used
> to download the firmware! who needs a programmer?* Does a compareable
> 18F PIC (32Kb flash, 8 Kb RAM) even exist?
>
> --
>
> Wouter van Ooijen


I'm not sure if you mean to compare an 8-bit 18F PIC to a 32-bit ARM.
There is a PIC32 that may be a reasonable comparison though it's
slightly larger. It comes in a 64-QFN but it has 256Kb flash and 32Kb
RAM: PIC32MX4xx

The ARM is about half the price, but it has 1/8th the flash and 1/4 the RAM..
-- Martin K

2011\02\23@095326 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> I'm not sure if you mean to compare an 8-bit 18F PIC to a 32-bit ARM.

Yes I was, because the original question was about 8-bit versus 32-bit chips. Feel free to substitute pic32, which is much more like an ARM or Cortex than an 8-bit PIC.

--
Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

2011\02\23@102800 by M.L.

flavicon
face
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Wouter van Ooijen <@spam@wouterKILLspamspamvoti.nl> wrote:
>> I'm not sure if you mean to compare an 8-bit 18F PIC to a 32-bit ARM.
>
> Yes I was, because the original question was about 8-bit versus 32-bit
> chips. Feel free to substitute pic32, which is much more like an ARM or
> Cortex than an 8-bit PIC.
>

Of course that makes sense. I wasn't thinking in the context of the
original post.

I guess this underscores for me the illogical notion of 32 bit MCUs
'killing' 8 bit.
32-bit may provide for quicker development if you want to write in C
(and there's talk of C++ at Microchip) but at the most basic level the
ALU of a 32 bit chip is always going to be switching more gates than
one with fewer bits, thus using more energy per cycle, if you care
about battery life.

-- Martin K

2011\02\23@111837 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face

On Feb 23, 2011, at 6:53 AM, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:

> Feel free to substitute pic32, which is much more like an ARM or
> Cortex than an 8-bit PIC.

So far, microchip hasn't been packaging the PIC32 to compete with  their 8-bit chips (The original questions was a sort of "a 16 pin ARM  is pretty cool but how am I supposed to deal with a 4x4 0.5mm BGA  package?" whine.)

Although the PIC24 16-bit chips are certainly encroaching on the  8bitters.  I just noticed that there's a PIC24 with 128K of program  space and 8K of RAM in a DIP28...

BillW

2011\02\23@114559 by alan.b.pearce

face picon face
> Although the PIC24 16-bit chips are certainly encroaching on the
> 8bitters.  I just noticed that there's a PIC24 with 128K of program
> space and 8K of RAM in a DIP28...
>
> BillW

Yes, some of these chips pack a lot in a small space. IIRC they do some USB ones in this package as well.
-- Scanned by iCritical.

2011\02\23@120924 by Michael Rigby-Jones

flavicon
face


> -----Original Message-----
> From: KILLspampiclist-bouncesKILLspamspammit.edu [RemoveMEpiclist-bouncesTakeThisOuTspammit.edu] On
Behalf
> Of M.L.
> Sent: 23 February 2011 15:27
> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
> Subject: Re: [EE] packaging of 32bit CPUs...
>
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Wouter van Ooijen <spamBeGonewouterspamBeGonespamvoti.nl>
wrote:
> >> I'm not sure if you mean to compare an 8-bit 18F PIC to a 32-bit
ARM.
> >
> > Yes I was, because the original question was about 8-bit versus
32-bit
> > chips. Feel free to substitute pic32, which is much more like an ARM
or
{Quote hidden}

But a calculation can likely be completed in fewer cycles, especially if
it involves values larger than 8 bits, and multiple bit shifts etc.

Regards

Mike

=======================================================================
This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The
information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by
law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must
not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any
person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have
received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use,
forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.
No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or
services.
=======================================================================

2011\02\23@142328 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
Michael Rigby-Jones wrote:
>> 32-bit may provide for quicker development if you want to write in C
>> (and there's talk of C++ at Microchip) but at the most basic level
>> the ALU of a 32 bit chip is always going to be switching more gates
>> than one with fewer bits, thus using more energy per cycle, if you
>> care about battery life.
>
> But a calculation can likely be completed in fewer cycles, especially
> if it involves values larger than 8 bits, and multiple bit shifts etc.

That may be true for some cases, but not most I think.  Having a 32 bit ALU
is good when you're banging around data that really is 32 bits wide.  Most
things microcontrollers do is rather mundane management.  Sure there is some
math on data, but most of the cycles are bumping counters, checking flags,
saving and restoring interrupt state, grabbing data from a hardware
register, bumping a index, checking for wrap, decrementing the loop counter
and checking for done, jumping back to the top of the loop, etc.

When your inputs are 10 or 12 bit A/D readings and your outputs 10 bit PWM
periods, even 16 bits is enough for most data values.

If speed of the math operations isn't a issue, then using multiple cycles in
the relatively rare case when you're doing 32 bit math and using less power
the rest of the time is a win.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2011\02\24@045757 by Michael Rigby-Jones

flavicon
face


> -----Original Message-----
> From: TakeThisOuTpiclist-bouncesEraseMEspamspam_OUTmit.edu [RemoveMEpiclist-bouncesspamTakeThisOuTmit.edu] On
Behalf
{Quote hidden}

especially
> > if it involves values larger than 8 bits, and multiple bit shifts
etc.
>
> That may be true for some cases, but not most I think.  
My view may be a bit skewed as the products I work with tend to have a
lot of 16 bit ADCs and DACs, so you end up with a lot of 32 bit math.  I
still use PIC's for the odd project, mostly stuff I do in my own time
though.

Even something as simple as shifting a 32 bit value by multiple bits on
a PIC is agonisingly slow compared to e.g. an ARM cored device where
it's a single instruction.

Mike

=======================================================================
This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The
information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by
law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must
not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any
person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have
received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use,
forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.
No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or
services.
=======================================================================

2011\02\24@053804 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> Even something as simple as shifting a 32 bit value by multiple bits on
> a PIC is agonisingly slow compared to e.g. an ARM cored device where
> it's a single instruction.

Actually it is a *part* of another instruction :)

--
Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

2011\02\28@161112 by M. Adam Davis

face picon face
It depends on what you consider "The market" and "hobbyist friendly".

I'm comfortable working with LQFPs down to 0.4mm pitch, and I have
taught others who have no soldering experience how to solder them.
There are a number of adaptors that allow one to use a tqfp where a
dip might be required (breadboard, etc).

The LPC1100 comes in an lqfp 48, and is under $3 [USD] in quantities
of one, and under $1.50 [USD] in quantities of 1k.

But if you're looking for DIP parts, you're going to have a hard time
finding 32 bit processors that fill your needs.  It may be better to
stick with platforms such as mbed which cost more, but are in a
hobbyist friendly package for development, then consider your options
if you decide to sell/distribute something.

It makes more sense for the manufacturer to focus on the packaging
that their larger customers want (those that buy in 5 and 6 digit
quantities) and let smaller companies fill the niche inbetween by
assembling them onto hobbyist friendly development boards and
adaptors.

If you're only building a few one-offs, the cost difference from $3 to
$30 isn't that great when it includes everything that the mbed.
netduino, etc platforms include.  If you really need 100 or more of
them, then you'll probably want to consider an assembler anyway.

Alternately, become comfortable with assembling 0.4mm pitch surface
mount parts, and you will have access to most of the sub 145 pin count
processors anyway.

-Adam

On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 5:42 AM, William "Chops" Westfield
<westfwEraseMEspam.....mac.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

>

2011\02\28@231124 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face

On Feb 28, 2011, at 1:11 PM, M. Adam Davis wrote:

> I'm comfortable working with LQFPs down to 0.4mm pitch
>
> The LPC1100 comes in an lqfp 48,

I was looking at their "low pin count" LPC1102, which comes in a 16pin  BGA (0.5mm pitch.)  What kind of design rules does one need to make a  proper PCB for that kind of package?  Can you cheat, since there are  only the four "internal" balls?  (except for them, it looks sorta like  a 12pin LCC package, which I'd be willing to attempt.)

For comparison, I usually try to make 0.5mm be my smallest drill...

BillW

2011\02\28@234144 by peter green

flavicon
face
William "Chops" Westfield wrote:
> On Feb 28, 2011, at 1:11 PM, M. Adam Davis wrote:
>
>  
>> I'm comfortable working with LQFPs down to 0.4mm pitch
>>
>> The LPC1100 comes in an lqfp 48,
>>    
>
> I was looking at their "low pin count" LPC1102, which comes in a 16pin  
> BGA (0.5mm pitch.)  What kind of design rules does one need to make a  
> proper PCB for that kind of package?  Can you cheat, since there are  
> only the four "internal" balls?  (except for them, it looks sorta like  
> a 12pin LCC package, which I'd be willing to attempt.)
>   The big issue is how to get the signals out from the internal balls. The classic way to get signals out from the internal balls in a BGA is to go out diagonally to a via  but with a 0.5mm pitch chip that would require a TINY drill. Vias in pads is another option but IIRC those vias have to be filled with copper to give a good soldering surface which adds to the board costs. Coming out on the top layer doesn't look very attractive either as the tracks would need to be tiny. I haven't managed to find reccomendations on pad size but assuming a 0.35mm pad bringing out a track between pads would require a 0.05mm (just under 2 mil) track size.

> For comparison, I usually try to make 0.5mm be my smallest drill...
>
> BillW
>
>


'[EE] packaging of 32bit CPUs...'
2011\03\01@003815 by RussellMc
face picon face
On 18 February 2011 23:42, William "Chops" Westfield <EraseMEwestfwspammac.com> wrote:
>
> There is all this hype at the moment about 32bit CPUs replacing 8bit
> cpus, as the cost of the CPU and memory goes down to 8bit levels, and
> chip manufacturers target the market.

Original untrimmed due to BCC

I suggest that the main thing that makes the hype hype is that they
have no brakes worth mentioning and can't corner well on a tight
twisting mountain road.


            http://ics.nxp.com/products/lpc1000/datasheet/lpc1102.pdf

2 mA at 3.3 Vdd at 12 MHz - that's OK
7 mA at 50 MHz  - that's OK too.

1 ma typical sleep mode 12 MHz - a new and intriguing meaning to the
word "sleep"
Notes 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

2 uA deep sleep - that's OK too - but see notes 2,3,8


2 25 C
3 All GPIO pins low, all pullups disabled
4 No ext clock, No PLL, IRFC enabled
5 No BOD
6 Pasting ...  All peripherals disabled in the SYSAHBCLKCTRL register.
Peripheral clocks to UART and SPI0/1 disabled in system configuration
block. Low-current mode PWR_LOW_CURRENT selected when running the
set_power routine in the power profiles

5 is a potential killer.

A quick canter through the sheet does not seem to say what BOF\D draws
when enabled.
That they should do such a naughty thing suggests it is >> 0 uA.


     Russell

On 18 February 2011 23:42, William "Chops" Westfield <RemoveMEwestfwEraseMEspamEraseMEmac.com> wrote:
>
> There is all this hype at the moment about 32bit CPUs replacing 8bit
> cpus, as the cost of the CPU and memory goes down to 8bit levels, and
> chip manufacturers target the market. Original untrimmed due to BCC

I suggest that the main thing that makes the hype hype is that they
have no brakes worth mentioning and can't corner well on a tight
twisting mountain road.


            http://ics.nxp.com/products/lpc1000/datasheet/lpc1102.pdf

2 mA at 3.3 Vdd at 12 MHz - that's OK
7 mA at 50 MHz  - that's OK too.

1 ma typical sleep mode 12 MHz - a new and intriguing meaning to the
word "sleep"
Notes 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

2 uA deep sleep - that's OK too - but see notes 2,3,8


2 25 C
3 All GPIO pins low, all pullups disabled
4 No ext clock, No PLL, IRFC enabled
5 No BOD
6 Pasting ...  All peripherals disabled in the SYSAHBCLKCTRL register.
Peripheral clocks to UART and SPI0/1 disabled in system configuration
block. Low-current mode PWR_LOW_CURRENT selected when running the
set_power routine in the power profiles

5 is a potential killer.

A quick canter through the sheet does not seem to say what BOF\D draws
when enabled.
That they should do such a naughty thing suggests it is >> 0 uA.


     Russell

On 18 February 2011 23:42, William "Chops" Westfield <RemoveMEwestfwspam_OUTspamKILLspammac.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

>

2011\03\01@065448 by Michael Rigby-Jones

flavicon
face


> -----Original Message-----
> From: RemoveMEpiclist-bouncesTakeThisOuTspamspammit.edu [EraseMEpiclist-bouncesspamspamspamBeGonemit.edu] On
Behalf
> Of RussellMc
> Sent: 01 March 2011 05:38
> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
> Subject: Re: [EE] packaging of 32bit CPUs...
>
> On 18 February 2011 23:42, William "Chops" Westfield <RemoveMEwestfwKILLspamspammac.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > There is all this hype at the moment about 32bit CPUs replacing 8bit
> > cpus, as the cost of the CPU and memory goes down to 8bit levels,
and
{Quote hidden}

The ARM cortex part from Energy
Micro(http://www.energymicro.com/technology/) is worth a look.  They
claim 900nA with POR, BOD and a Real time counter active and a 20nA
shutdown current.  Not quite up there with the nanowatt PICs and the
MSP430, but pretty good if you need the horsepower it comes with.

Regards

Mike
=======================================================================
This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The
information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by
law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must
not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any
person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have
received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use,
forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.
No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or
services.
=======================================================================

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2011 , 2012 only
- Today
- New search...