Searching \ for '[PIC][SX] Pros and cons of SX vx PIC' 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/ubicom/devices.htm?key=sx
Search entire site for: '[SX] Pros and cons of SX vx PIC'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC][SX] Pros and cons of SX vx PIC'
2006\08\17@085847 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
Hiya,

I was just wondering of pros and cons of using SX instead of PIC? As I have
heard SX is a bit cheaper and faster than PIC, but not sure if there is
anything agains using it?

Tamas


--
unPIC -- The PIC Disassembler
http://unpic.sourceforge.net

2006\08\17@091401 by Michael Rigby-Jones

picon face
>-----Original Message-----
>From: spam_OUTpiclist-bouncesTakeThisOuTspammit.edu [.....piclist-bouncesKILLspamspam@spam@mit.edu]
>Sent: 17 August 2006 13:59
>To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
>Subject: [PIC][SX] Pros and cons of SX vx PIC
>
>
>Hiya,
>
>I was just wondering of pros and cons of using SX instead of
>PIC? As I have heard SX is a bit cheaper and faster than PIC,
>but not sure if there is anything agains using it?

The SX is a faster processor for sure, but aside from ports and timers is almost totaly lacking in peripherals.  The high speed means that you can use "virtual perhipherals", i.e. bit bashed, but this will somewhat negate the extra speed depending on the complexity of the peripheral.  There is also only 5 basic devices available in the whole SX family, and only only one available in PDIP package from what I can see.

The instruction set is essentialy the same as the PIC, though some instructions have different names.

I guess the answer is that if you need the raw speed, then the SX may be a good choice.

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.
=======================================================================

2006\08\17@092210 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> I was just wondering of pros and cons of using SX instead of
> PIC? As I have
> heard SX is a bit cheaper and faster than PIC, but not sure
> if there is
> anything agains using it?

- very limited range
- pic12 core (with some extensions)
- current consumption
+ fast

and:
requires different programmer/ICD, probably different compiler

Wouter van Ooijen

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


2006\08\17@094112 by Brian Riley

picon face
The SX-28 which is still available in PDIP was designed as a pin-for-
pin replacement for the 16C57 it would also be a 'drop-in'  
replacement for the PIC as well except its a .3 wide chip and the PIC  
is a .6 ... I have seen a number of board that had two sets of holes  
so it would be your choice.

There is also some kind "PIC compatibility' mode in some of the  
various SX assemblers. There are some PIC/SX translators for ASM.  
Further there is a pretty good basic compiler available free from  
Parallax called SX/B, that is getting better all the time. The most  
recent release added some pretty good functionality. Its a 'flavor'  
of PBASIC  and it supports in-line assembler. It compiles to an ASM  
source file the assembled to object.

Parallax sells an SX48 proto board for $10 thats really hard to  
beat ... top quality board, power supply, good size prototyping area,  
SX48 chip (SM) already soldered down, will accept resonators crystals  
or 75 MHz clock can, ICSP connector already in place. Supposedly, any  
day now, Parallax is releasing an equivalent board for the SX28 (SM  
VERSION)

---
cheers ... 73 de brian  riley,  n1bq , underhill center, vermont
  <http://web.mac.com/brianbr/>  Tech Blog
  <http://www.wulfden.org/DiskShop.shtml>
   Home of the
      K107 Serial LCD Controller Kit   FT817 Power Conditioner Kit
      Tab Robot Laser Tag Kit            MSP430 Chips and Connectors
      Propeller Robot Controller         SX48 "Tech Board" Kit



On Aug 17, 2006, at 9:13 AM, Michael Rigby-Jones wrote:

>> {Original Message removed}

2006\08\17@113938 by Bob Axtell

face picon face


Brian Riley wrote:
{Quote hidden}

<respectful snip>

It seems that with an NTSC sync seperator it would be possible to create
a video overlay generator
using a fast (48Mhz) SX device. The data is fed in with TTL serial
(bit-banged) and would write to
a pixel RAM. The SX might then pump out white-level data to accommodate
the overlay. Otherwise,
there is little economic benefit in using SX components that I am aware of.

--Bob

2006\08\17@115349 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
Thanks everybody for the reply. Probably stay with PICs at the moment :-)

Tamas


On 17/08/06, Bob Axtell <engineerspamKILLspamneomailbox.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2006\08\17@131017 by John Chung

picon face
The main problem with SX is the availability. I guess
the biggest draw is the speed of the processor but the
memory is very limited.
http://www.parallax.com/sx/chips.asp

I must admit the speed is the real again to SX. I am
not aware of other MCU that can reach it's MIPS.

John

PS: If money is not an issue than try this.
http://www.parallax.com/propeller/index.asp


--- Wouter van Ooijen <.....wouterKILLspamspam.....voti.nl> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> --

2006\08\17@140059 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> I must admit the speed is the real again to SX. I am
> not aware of other MCU that can reach it's MIPS.

single-chip ARMs that run at 60 MHz (60 ARM MIPS) are common.
external-memory ARMs that run at > 100 MHz are common too (though not as
easy to use, and maybe not what you would call an MCU).

Wouter van Ooijen

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


2006\08\17@140831 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
> I must admit the speed is the real again to SX. I am
> not aware of other MCU that can reach it's MIPS.
>
>  

Actually, 20Mhz PICs easily run at 28Mhz with an external oscillator (I've
done it many times as a speed test) but the PIC begins to draw some current.
And of course, Microchip will void the warranty of any device used that
fast.


--Bob

2006\08\17@141113 by James Newton, Host

face picon face
Current consumption can be as good or better than a pic.
http://www.sxlist.com/techref/ubicom/power.htm

---
James.



> {Original Message removed}

2006\08\17@142945 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> Actually, 20Mhz PICs easily run at 28Mhz with an external
> oscillator (I've
> done it many times as a speed test) but the PIC begins to
> draw some current.
> And of course, Microchip will void the warranty of any device
> used that fast.

A PIC runs 1:4, an SX 1:1. So a 75 MHz SX is compareable to a 300 MHz
PIC. I don't think you can overclock it that far with easy means.

Wouter van Ooijen

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





2006\08\17@144201 by John Chung

picon face
Any links on these ARM MCU?

John

--- Wouter van Ooijen <EraseMEwouterspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTvoti.nl> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> --

2006\08\17@144507 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> Current consumption can be as good or better than a pic.
> http://www.sxlist.com/techref/ubicom/power.htm

That is not 100% fair, an SX will often need a higher clock speed to
emulate the peripheral hardware that it does not have. Except of course
when something is emulated/programmed that no PIC has in hardware, like
a composite video signal.

Wouter van Ooijen

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


2006\08\17@152017 by James Newtons Massmind

face picon face
Yes, but I don't believe they have a 4:1 pipeline. The SX is actually
executing at about 75 MIPS (Million Instructions Per Second). So if you
write a program for the SX that just toggles a pin, and hook up a frequency
counter, you will get something like 40 Mhz on that pin.

---
James Newton, Host of SXList.com
jamesspamspam_OUTsxlist.com 1-619-652-0593 fax:1-208-279-8767
SX FAQ / Code / Tutorials / Documentation:
http://www.sxlist.com Pick faster!





> {Original Message removed}

2006\08\17@153559 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> Any links on these ARM MCU?

for a start check philips LPC, Atmel SAM7.

Wouter van Ooijen

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


2006\08\17@154041 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
Jeez! That means that SX is muuuch faster! So that an SX has a 4MHz internal
RC just as PIC but runs 4 times faster until you use AD for example? Which
periferies are slower in term of clock/handle for the SX?

Tamas


On 17/08/06, James Newtons Massmind <@spam@jamesnewtonKILLspamspammassmind.org> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> > {Original Message removed}

2006\08\17@160659 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> Yes, but I don't believe they have a 4:1 pipeline.

I don't understand what you mean. A pipeline has little influence on the
execution speed compared to the clock, except when it gets in the way
(for PIC and SX for instance when the PC is written), and when you need
the exact input-output latency of a signal.

12/14/16 bit core PICs divide the clock by four to derive the internal
execution clock, to the 'normal' rate is 1 instruction per 4 crystal
clocks. The clock drives a two-stage pipeline. This pipeline is flushed
when the PC is written, so when this happens one such instruction is
executed in 8 crystal clocks.

An SX (in its native 'on steroids' mode) drives its pipeline directly
from the crystal clock, so it executes one instruction per crystal clock
cycle. When the PC is written this takes 3 clocks (2 instruction
penalty), so I assume it has a 3-stage pipeline.

An ARM7 (the most common now) is much like an SX: a 3-stage pipeline,
driven directly by the clock, and a 2-instruction penalty for a PC
write.

> The SX is actually
> executing at about 75 MIPS (Million Instructions Per Second).
> So if you
> write a program for the SX that just toggles a pin, and hook
> up a frequency
> counter, you will get something like 40 Mhz on that pin.

Same on an ARM (but only if the peripheral bus is running at the same
speed as the CPU).

Wouter van Ooijen

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


2006\08\17@160936 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> Jeez! That means that SX is muuuch faster! So that an SX has
> a 4MHz internal
> RC just as PIC but runs 4 times faster

yes

> until you use AD for example?

an AD on an SX? You don't get it: an SX is just a very fast processor,
except for some timer(s?) there ar *no* peripherals. The whole point is
that you create (emulate) your own (digital) peripherals by clever
programming.

Wouter van Ooijen

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


2006\08\17@164751 by Brian Riley

picon face
Terry Hitt of Hitt consulting, who is also the author of the SX/B  
compiler for Parallax, has already built and marketed a video  
generator based on an SX28 and a character overlay based on an SX48  
device.


On Aug 17, 2006, at 11:39 AM, Bob Axtell wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> --

2006\08\17@171514 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
Brian Riley wrote:
> Terry Hitt of Hitt consulting, who is also the author of the SX/B  
> compiler for Parallax, has already built and marketed a video  
> generator based on an SX28 and a character overlay based on an SX48  
> device.
>
>  
Got a link? I could just buy his then.

--Bob

2006\08\17@172851 by James Newtons Massmind

face picon face
And he is not the first:
http://www.sxlist.com/techref/ubicom/lib/io/dev/video/index.htm There are
many nice SX based examples of bit banged video. Even in color! And the SX
can detect horizontal sync in an existing video signal so overlay can be
done with only a few external components
http://www.sxlist.com/techref/ubicom/lib/io/dev/video/hsync-ng.htm

---
James Newton, Host of SXList.com
RemoveMEjamesTakeThisOuTspamsxlist.com 1-619-652-0593 fax:1-208-279-8767
SX FAQ / Code / Tutorials / Documentation:
http://www.sxlist.com Pick faster!





> {Original Message removed}

2006\08\17@173336 by Brian Riley

picon face
I have both of his boards and they are very good.  I bought his first  
board, display generator, which was then a 28 pin dip SX28, when he  
was selling bare pcboards and I downloaded and programmed it myself,  
much cheaper ... the overlay is an SX48 surface mount, you have to  
buy that already A&T ... I have the overlay board on my bench right  
now being prepared for a high altitude balloon launch in the late  
Fall sometime, it will be part of a full APRS and ATV package.


   <http://www.sxvm.com/>



---
cheers ... 73 de brian  riley,  n1bq , underhill center, vermont
  <http://web.mac.com/brianbr/>  Tech Blog
  <http://www.wulfden.org/DiskShop.shtml>
   Home of the
      K107 Serial LCD Controller Kit   FT817 Power Conditioner Kit
      Tab Robot Laser Tag Kit            MSP430 Chips and Connectors
      Propeller Robot Controller         SX48 "Tech Board" Kit



On Aug 17, 2006, at 5:15 PM, Bob Axtell wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> --

2006\08\17@175739 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
James Newtons Massmind wrote:
> And he is not the first:
> http://www.sxlist.com/techref/ubicom/lib/io/dev/video/index.htm There are
> many nice SX based examples of bit banged video. Even in color! And the SX
> can detect horizontal sync in an existing video signal so overlay can be
> done with only a few external components
> http://www.sxlist.com/techref/ubicom/lib/io/dev/video/hsync-ng.htm
>
> ---
> James Newton, Host of SXList.com
> spamBeGonejamesspamBeGonespamsxlist.com 1-619-652-0593 fax:1-208-279-8767
> SX FAQ / Code / Tutorials / Documentation:
> http://www.sxlist.com Pick faster!
>
>  
This is all interesting, but there needs to be an inexpensive way to
replace the ST Video overlay
chips that are used in police cars everywhere. ST has dropped them. They
have to paint
standard 8 x 10 pixel characters, 26 characters per line, 12 lines. Only
BOBIII can do it
at the moment.

Replacing the sync seperator is a waste of SX power. I'd use an external
sync seperator, and
let the SX handle writing the pixels and background serial input
processing. That's why I wanted to
check the link and see if Hitt did it right.  

--Bob
>  
>  
>
>  
>> {Original Message removed}

2006\08\17@180435 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
Brian Riley wrote:
{Quote hidden}

No its just 6 lines of 16 characters, law enforcement needs 12 lines of
26 characters. See, the these large characters
block the screen too much. But the price is right.

--Bob

2006\08\17@183002 by Brian Riley

picon face
Bob,

you read too quickly, the video display card does 16x6, but the video  
overlay board does 24x8, still a little short but better


On Aug 17, 2006, at 6:02 PM, Bob Axtell wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> --

2006\08\17@191700 by Maarten Hofman

face picon face
>
>
> you read too quickly, the video display card does 16x6, but the video
> overlay board does 24x8, still a little short but better


I like to take this opportunity to indicate that a PIC can do nice video
stuff too... Of course overlaying is a bit tricky, but generating an actual
signal, be it without colour burst, is possible. See
http://jen.mosha.net/PIC/tv.html for a 20 MHz, 14*10 version, with user
definable characters, 56*20 pixel graphics mode and sound. At home I have a
working version on a 16F688 using the internal oscillator of 8 MHz, which
isn't as fancy but still delivers the same amount of characters.

Greetings,
Maarten Hofman.

2006\08\17@205542 by James Newtons Massmind

face picon face
> This is all interesting, but there needs to be an inexpensive
> way to replace the ST Video overlay chips that are used in
> police cars everywhere. ST has dropped them. They have to
> paint standard 8 x 10 pixel characters, 26 characters per
> line, 12 lines. Only BOBIII can do it at the moment.

26 x 12 is 312 so you would need external RAM. The SX's have 262 bytes at
most.

Well, actually... How many characters in the set? If each char will fit in 5
bits... That is 1560 bits to hold 312 characters or 195 8 bit bytes. The
question is can you shift out 5 bits between each character. That cycle
repeats every 5 bytes or 8 characters. So how many cycles to unpack the
bits? What the heck, its an interesting challenge and I'm not doing anything
important...

The SX will allow you to access W as a file register with an option bit set.
http://www.sxlist.com/techref/ubicom/reg/working.htm

PIC programmers may want to refer to
http://www.sxlist.com/techref/ubicom/inst.htm to rosetta the SX speak


;unpack 8 characters of 5 bits each from 4 bytes.
; 6 cycles for each character

       MOV W,char        ;get the character index
       MOV FSR,W        ;point to it.

;char 0, bits 0-4 of byte 0
       MOV W, IND        ;get byte 0
       MOV temp, W        ;save it but
       AND W, $E0        ; only bits 5-7
       SWAP W,temp        ; for next time
       AND W, $1F        ; and bits 0-4 now
       CALL charout

;char 1, bits 5-7 of byte 0 and bits 0-1 of byte 1
       INC FSR        ;point to byte 1
       MOV W, IND        ;get byte 1
       AND W, $02        ; bits 0-1 = bits 3-4 of char 1
       OR W,temp        ; W=34xxx012
       MOV W, <>Wreg; W=x01234xx
       RL Wreg        ; W=01234xxx
       CALL charout

;char 2: bits 2-6 of byte 1
       MOV W, IND        ;get byte 1 again
       MOV temp, W        ;save it for next char
       AND W, $7C        ;use only bits 2-6
       CLC                ;shift not rotate
       RL Wreg        ; 2-6 is 1-5
       RL Wreg        ; is 0-4
       CALL charout

;char 3: bit 7 of byte 1 and bits 0-3 of byte 2
       INC FSR        ;point to byte 2
       MOV W, IND        ;and get it
       AND W, $0F        ;but only the lower niddble
       RR Wreg        ;right shift since carry is clear
       SNB temp.7        ;if byte 1 bit 7 was set
        SETB Wreg.0; then set bit 0
       CALL charout

;char 4: bits 4-7 of byte 2 and  bit 0 of byte 3
       MOV W, <>IND;get byte 2 nibble swapped
       AND W, $0F        ;keep only the lower (was upper)
       INC FSR        ;point to byte 3
       SNB IND.0        ;if our top bit needs it
        SETB Wreg.4; then set it.
       CALL charout

;char 5: bits 1-5 of byte 3
       MOV W, IND        ;get byte 3
       MOV temp, W        ;save for next char
       AND W, $3E        ;take only bits 1-5
       CLC                ;make sure carry is clear
       RL Wreg        ; 1-5 is now 0-4
       INC FSR        ;now on byte 4
       CALL charout

;char 6: bits 6-7 of byte 3 and 0-2 of byte 4
       MOV W, IND        ;get byte 4
       AND W, $03        ; bits 0-2
       RR temp        ;carry is byte 3 bit 7
       RR Wreg        ;W=B3.7,B4.0-2
       RR temp        ;carry is byte 3 bit 6
       RR Wreg        ;w=B3.6-7,B4.0-2
       CALL charout

;char 7; bits 3-7 of byte 4
       MOV W, IND
       AND W, $F8        ;take only bits 3-7
       CLC                ;clear carry
       RL Wreg        ; 3-7 now 2-6
       RL Wreg        ; 1-5
       RL Wreg        ; 0-4
       CALL charout

       INC FSR


Not bad... 6 cycles per character.

Then charout has to IREAD the raster line for that char and shift it out to
the pin. That is another, err... Well, that depends on how you do it. If you
use port A as a 4 bit shift register it should be about 20 cycles total. The
IREAD is 4
http://www.sxlist.com/techref/ubicom/inst/iread.htm but you have to set up
for it...

       MOV temp,W                ;save our char index
       MOV W, TablePage        ;point to the start of the raster data
       SB temp.4                ; or if the char is > 15
        MOV W, TablePage+1        ; to the next page
       MOV M, W                ;save that as our pointers high byte
       MOV W,<>temp        ;index *16 (wish we could *10)
       AND W,$F0                ;and clear the high bit
       OR W, scan_line        ;0-9 6B/char wasted to avoid *10
       IREAD                        ;Read instruction at M:W into M:W
       MOV temp,W                ;save the result

Notice that the characters could be 12 bits wide... Too bad we can turn them
90'

Now we just have to pump them out the pin...
       MOV RA,W        ;bit 0 on RA.0 which is video out
       NOP                ; the other RA pins are N/C outputs
       RL RA                ;bit 1 on RA.0
       NOP
       RL RA                ;bit 2
       NOP
       RL RA                ;bit 3
       MOV W,<>temp
       MOV RA,W        ;bit 4
       NOP
       RL RA                ;bit 5
       NOP
       RL RA                ;bit 6
       NOP
       RL RA                ;bit 7
       NOP
       CLR RA        ;blank between chars.
       RET

And that is all for charout... A total of 10+18 cycles plus the 6 plus call
return = around 35 cycles per character... Hummm... A scan line has 52.6uS
of actual video
http://www.sxlist.com/techref/io/video/ntsc.htm so to get our 26 chars we
need about 2uS per char and with 35 cycles per char that means each cycle
must take 0.0578 uS or 57.8nS which sets the clock speed at 17.3 Mhz. Barely
moving on an SX. Did I do that right?


Back in the main program...

       INC block_count
       CJNA block_count, 3, Loop

;This adds a little extra delay between each set of 8 chars..
;Not enough to worry about
;and it gets us to 24 chars so we just need to copy in the
;code to unpack 2 more chars from the code above.

;char 0, bits 0-4 of byte 0
       MOV W, IND        ;get byte 0
       MOV temp, W        ;save it but
       AND W, $E0        ; only bits 5-7
       SWAP W,temp        ; for next time
       AND W, $1F        ; and bits 0-4 now
       CALL charout

;char 1, bits 5-7 of byte 0 and bits 0-1 of byte 1
       INC FSR        ;point to byte 1
       MOV W, IND        ;get byte 1
       AND W, $02        ; bits 0-1 = bits 3-4 of char 1
       OR W,temp        ; W=34xxx012
       MOV W, <>Wreg; W=x01234xx
       RL Wreg        ; W=01234xxx
       CALL charout
       INC FSR

;And we are done with the scan line.

       CALL WaitHSync
       INC scan_line
       CJNA        scan_line, 10, Loop

       MOV W, 26
       ADD char,W
       INC char_line
       CJNA        char_line, 12, Loop

       MOV W, char_ram
       MOV char, char_ram
       CLR scan_line
       CLR char_line
       GOTO Loop


What sort of interface? Serial?

Serial has to be interleaved with the rest of the code, but it turns out
that 1200 baud is just close enough. From the Servid code:

; While serial line idle, sample every scan line.  Once start bit is
; detected, delay 6 scan lines, then sample every 13.  This results
; in a 1208 bps rate, 0.6% fast.

You can also do it at 2400 with 3 then 6 then 7 then 6, etc... scan lines.
4800 might be do-able.

An SX48 could do this. Easily.


> Replacing the sync separator is a waste of SX power. I'd use
> an external sync separator, and let the SX handle writing the
> pixels and background serial input processing. That's why I
> wanted to check the link and see if Hitt did it right.  

If the software can do it, you can reduce your unit cost by the price of a
sync separator (I guess they don't cost much?). But that is up to you, of
course.

---
James Newton, Host of SXList.com
TakeThisOuTjamesEraseMEspamspam_OUTsxlist.com 1-619-652-0593 fax:1-208-279-8767
SX FAQ / Code / Tutorials / Documentation:
http://www.sxlist.com Pick faster!


2006\08\18@104317 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
Thanks, Brian. Hmmm. It MIGHT be close enough.

--Bob

Brian Riley wrote:
{Quote hidden}

>> --

2006\08\20@053428 by scott larson

picon face
Rickard Gunee has done black and white video pong game with a 16F84
and color video tetris game with an SX28.
http://www.rickard.gunee.com/projects/
An interesting read for the OP and others interested in video.

-Scott

2006\08\20@105629 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
Reading, reading :-)

Thanks,
Tamas


On 20/08/06, scott larson <RemoveMEgoldscottspamTakeThisOuTgmail.com> wrote:
>
> Rickard Gunee has done black and white video pong game with a 16F84
> and color video tetris game with an SX28.
> http://www.rickard.gunee.com/projects/
> An interesting read for the OP and others interested in video.
>
> -Scott
> -

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2006 , 2007 only
- Today
- New search...