Searching \ for 'ATMEL AT90S1200' 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=atmel+at90s1200
Search entire site for: 'ATMEL AT90S1200'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'ATMEL AT90S1200'
1997\10\24@165204 by Tim Crist

flavicon
face
    I was talking to a salesman the other day about up-integrating my
    design.  He represented ATMEL and claimed that the AT90S1200 is
    equivalent to the PIC16C84.  I noticed his lips moving which makes
    me doubt the validity (i.e. How do you know if a salesman is Lying?
    answer: His lips are moving).

    Does anyone have experience with this part or company?  How about
    code compatibility?

    I've heard they have a flash part that will be available 1Q98 that
    will do 200 MIPs - just kidding, Tjaart.

    TIA,

    Tim

1997\10\24@200420 by Douglas J.A.R.Sasse

flavicon
face
I was talking to a salesman the other day about up-integrating my design.
He represented ATMEL and claimed that the AT90S1200 is  equivalent to the
PIC16C84.  I noticed his lips moving which makes  me doubt the validity
(i.e. How do you know if a salesman is Lying?  answer: His lips are moving).
Does anyone have experience with this part or company?  How about  code
compatibility?  I've heard they have a flash part that will be available
1Q98 that  will do 200 MIPs - just kidding, Tjaart.
TIA,
Tim

Tim, check out Steve Bolt's Web Page at http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbolt and look
at the "vision" part of his robot.
regards,
Http://ic.mankato.mn.us/~douglas<-LINK to Wirz Electronics&Dontronics
spam_OUTdouglasTakeThisOuTspamic.mankato.mn.us
Thai
ÁÕ͈æÀè–̇‹áÀ×ñÀÜÕ‹á׋Íè
.....douglasKILLspamspam@spam@nexus.mnic.net
Snail-Mail:
Douglas J.A.R.Sasse
P.O.Box 1064
Mankato, Minnesota 56002-1064
U.S.A.
aka- Jeffery Allen Rand
56002-1064
U.S.A.

1997\10\25@023102 by Antti Lukats

flavicon
face
At 10:57 AM 24/10/97 PST8, you wrote:
>     I was talking to a salesman the other day about up-integrating my
>     design.  He represented ATMEL and claimed that the AT90S1200 is
>     equivalent to the PIC16C84.  I noticed his lips moving which makes
>     me doubt the validity (i.e. How do you know if a salesman is Lying?
>     answer: His lips are moving).
>
>     Does anyone have experience with this part or company?  How about
>     code compatibility?

code compatibility: NO
code memory size: 1/2 of C84, (== 600..700 PIC Words)
RAM Size: 32 Words ( ie less than 36 words on C84)
EEPROM Size: 64 (Same as C(F)84)
Power Consumption >> PIC
Speed >> PIC
Internal RC, yes, External NO
Stack 3 Level! against 8 in C84
Device Programming simpler than PIC (no 12 V needed)

for AT90S1200 applications look
http://arbasic.com/appnotes

as of the salesman talk: he was lying and he was not lying-

not lying: PIC16C84 is _closest_ equivalent to AT90S1200
lying: not all PIC16C84 designs fit into AT90S1200 (many do)

antti
http://avrbasic.com         -- AVR Basic Compiler
http://sistudio.com/bswfe   -- Basic Stamp Windows Front End

1997\10\25@060318 by Leon Heller

flavicon
picon face
In message <9709248777.AA877715988spamKILLspamCCGATE.HAC.COM>, Tim Crist
<.....tjcristKILLspamspam.....CCGATE.HAC.COM> writes
>     I was talking to a salesman the other day about up-integrating my
>     design.  He represented ATMEL and claimed that the AT90S1200 is
>     equivalent to the PIC16C84.  I noticed his lips moving which makes
>     me doubt the validity (i.e. How do you know if a salesman is Lying?
>     answer: His lips are moving).
>
>     Does anyone have experience with this part or company?  How about
>     code compatibility?
>
>     I've heard they have a flash part that will be available 1Q98 that
>     will do 200 MIPs - just kidding, Tjaart.

I've been playing about with the Atmel AT90S1200, and am very impressed.
They are much RISCier than the 16F84 (which isn't really RISC at all),
much faster (62.5 ns cycle time at 16 MHz and most instructions are
single-cycle), have a nicer architecture and instruction set, are easier
to program (Jerry Meng's excellent parallel port programmer just uses 4
diodes and is self-powered), better suited to high-level languages and
cheaper. Atmel give away the development software, like Microchip. The
only disadvantage is that they only have 3 levels of stack.

Leon
--
Leon Heller: EraseMEleonspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTlfheller.demon.co.uk http://www.lfheller.demon.co.uk
Amateur Radio Callsign G1HSM    Tel: +44 (0) 118 947 1424
See http://www.lfheller.demon.co.uk/rcm.htm for details of a
low-cost reconfigurable computing module using the XC6216 FPGA

1997\10\25@070700 by wwl

picon face
>They are much RISCier than the 16F84 (which isn't really RISC at all),
Who cares ? as long as a chip does the job & meets all requirements, I
don't care if its risc, cisc, analog or pixie dust inside the package!

1997\10\25@140451 by electronics

flavicon
face
Tim Crist wrote:
>
>      I was talking to a salesman the other day about up-integrating my
>      design.  He represented ATMEL and claimed that the AT90S1200 is
>      equivalent to the PIC16C84.  I noticed his lips moving which makes
>      me doubt the validity (i.e. How do you know if a salesman is Lying?
>      answer: His lips are moving).
>
>      Does anyone have experience with this part or company?  How about
>      code compatibility?
>
>      I've heard they have a flash part that will be available 1Q98 that
It is available from July 97
It have own code /see http://www.atmel.com/
>      will do 200 MIPs - just kidding, Tjaart.
>
>      TIA,
>
>      Tim

--
Vladimir Dobrovinski, Project manager
Electronics Design Ltd.
P.O.Box 1213, /Tuulemae 5/, EE-0014  Tallinn, Estonia
Phone: +372 2 430254
Fax:   +372 2 430254

1997\10\26@192451 by Ron Kreymborg

flavicon
face
I have also just started to look at the Atmel AT90 controllers. They have
a couple of 20-pin and 40-pin packages with program memory up to 8K bytes.
There are no "pages" and in general the instruction sets seem to have
fewer special cases than the PIC parts. All models except the 1200 have
the stack in data space. Assembler/debugger is free. No info on prices yet
but they seem worth following up.

Ron

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ron Kreymborg                   Systems Administrator
Monash University               CRC for Southern Hemisphere Meteorology
Wellington Road
Clayton, VIC 3168               Phone     : 061-3-9905-9671
Australia                       Fax       : 061-3-9905-9689
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Fri, 24 Oct 1997, Tim Crist wrote:

{Quote hidden}

1997\10\27@061232 by : Cassie Carstens

flavicon
face
> for AT90S1200 applications look
> http://arbasic.com/appnotes

                         http://avrbasic.com/appnotes
works better

Regards


'ATMEL AT90S1200'
1997\11\05@104254 by Marc Heuler
flavicon
face
Hi Tim (Tim Crist), in <9709248777.AA877715988spamspam_OUTCCGATE.HAC.COM> on Oct 24 you
wrote:

>      I was talking to a salesman the other day about up-integrating my
>      design.  He represented ATMEL and claimed that the AT90S1200 is
>      equivalent to the PIC16C84.  I noticed his lips moving which makes
>      me doubt the validity (i.e. How do you know if a salesman is Lying?
>      answer: His lips are moving).
>
>      Does anyone have experience with this part or company?  How about
>      code compatibility?

I have used both the PIC16C84 and the AT90S1200 (although only once so
far).  The S1200 is faster (16M instruction cycles vs 2.5M for the PIC) but
not all instructions are one-cycle.  The PIC is more straight forward.

The S1200 has less program memory (only 512 asm commands vs 1024) which
makes several uses impossible, ie storing text messages lets you run out of
memory quickly.

Unfortunately the S1200 can't be RC-clocked at full speed.

Considering the S1200 is cheaper (only 40% of PIC price here) it is a good
choice for new projects.  I really like ATMEL, I used their AT89C52 and a
GAL equivalent already.

On the other hand there's room for improvment.

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1997 , 1998 only
- Today
- New search...