Pic or 8051 , which is perfect for me?

[mmohamed15]

belive me avr is bettter in the attachment you will find a comparison that will persuade you to choose avr

 

[photonix]

If you have used 8051, stick with it. There are many 8051 Derivatives outside like MSC1210,AduC812,etc. I myself have been using PIC16F877A for 1,5 years and it proved good for my college projects and it is very simple. I think AVR is fun to work with tooI just started learning AVR, and I enjoy learning it....

 

[CMOS]

You can even use P89LPC9xx series from Philips. These are small form-factor accelerated speed 8051 microcontrollers. Check this catalog page
**broken link removed**

 

[masud58]

8051 aslo good, easy . i am working with it. pic also good, but i am new, i have no teacher to learn pic. it will take long time to learn it. when 8051 core mix with pic i will going to be a madman.


Thanks
Masud Rana
Matrix Electronics
Dhaka
Banglasdesh

http://geocities.com/matrixele/mypage

 

[silvio]

Hi Masud,

I have done many product with 8051 core like atmel

You can use AT89C51AC2 from Atmel.
For data sheet look at http://www.atmel.com/dyn/resources/prod_documents/doc4127.pdf

It has exactly what you need:

10-bit Resolution Analog to Digital Converter (ADC) with 8 Multiplexed Inputs
21-bit Watchdog Timer (7 Programmable Bits)
2 KB of On-chip EEPROM
32 KB of On-chip Flash Memory
1 KB of On-chip XRAM
256 Bytes of On-chip RAM
and something you'll like and appreciate : 2 KB of On-chip Flash for Bootloader
It's available in PLCC44 package, not DIP but I don't think it would be a problem.

Read about how his UART bootloader it's working at:
http://www.atmel.com/dyn/resources/prod_documents/doc4231.pdf

Take care of errata sheet, too
http://www.atmel.com/dyn/resources/prod_documents/doc4159.pdf

 

[mrbautista]

You can get a lot of info here

**broken link removed**

and download a demo software from crownhills

**broken link removed**

I hope this will help you if you are interested about basic PIC Micro programming

 

[photonix]

If you decided to start with Microchip PIC, try to look at : www.microchip.com and www.piclist.com and then read the Reference Manual (PIC MidRange Reference Manual or PIC18 Reference Manual).

 

[masud58]

please look at my link
http://www.geocities.com/matrixele/mypage.html

 

[7rots51]

I have experience with 8051 for 10 years and alsoworked with AVR for 3 years.(at now I am working with AVR),I also have a test on PIC last week for CAN (pic18f458) ,I think AVR is better than 8051 and PIC in speed(MIPS,at same Freq) and better at instruction set,and all the peripherals that PIC have ,AVR also have all of them,and in some cases have more.Very good and free softwares also exist on AVR,also AVR is optimized for C.

I recommend AVR for 8 bit and ARM7 from Atmel and TI for 16/32 bit applications.

Regards

 

[wjmzh]

you can also select TI msp430,it has 12bit adc.Msp430f135 is very cheap now .EMC fo 430 is better than most 51'.

 

[mzeitoun2002]

Salam,

If u realy prefere 8051 and if u r really familiar with it then choosing avr is the best choice u can use ATMEGA8535 its architecture is nearly like AT89XXX plus the much more peripherals i think u will feel familiar with it and won't need a teacher

I respect pic and i'm working with both pic & Avr but in your case switching to AVR is better with a little work

Hope this could help u

 

[Saboy]

stick on what you know. It will take a long time to learn another MCU.

 

[sp]

I have a question here... which i wanted to ask for so long but i dunno how to ask.... i will try now...

actually, which is the best?... the FPGA/CPLD can also be used as controller, u can create ur own controller using this digital things...

so actually my question change to wad is the advantage(s) of using FPGA/CPLD or PIC/uController as the controller... i would prefer to use FPGA things,,, as it is easier to reprogram/code are easier to write/ language r very useful(verilog, VHDL)... true?

wad is the advantage of using the PIC/uC over the FPGA type of controller?.. cheaper?

many thank you...

regards,
sp

 

[samcheetah]

yes, you have answered the question yourself. a microcontroller like the PIC18F458 from microchip would be cheaper than the one that you will implement on an FPGA. actually it depends on the application. if a microcontroller from some manufacturer satisfies your needs then there is no need to use an FPGA and learn the language (verilog/VHDL) and the process involved in implementing designs on FPGAs.

 

[sp]

thanks sam...

i would like to know wad is the limitation on PIC n uC...

i hav learn 8051... n assembly language is terrible...

so far.. i hav heard tht the instruction on PIC like BASIC language is very simple to learn but it has only limited function,,, true?

but the HDL language in digital design is superb.. very flexible...

and i think the uC n PIC is the "microprogrammed" type & the FPGA stuff are "hardwired" type... am i correct?

so generally, hardwired is faster than the microprogrammed.. true?.. this is wad i read in a book... so actually wad is the "faster" mean?.. is it tht the FPGA stuff can support higher frequency clk so the sequential circuits design can b run faster?

sorry for too many question...

thank you

regards,
sp

 

[klystron]

The pros and cons of the two architectures include:

PIC
Hardware made by only one supplier (C)
Reduced instruction set (RISC)(P)
No external code and I/O(C)



8051
Complex instruction set (CISC)(C)
Multiple HW suppliers(12)(wide choice) (P)
External and I/O (memory mapped) (P)
Up to 100MHz (average 3 clock mcycle per instruction)(P)

 

[sgokhan]

Is it possible to code simulation with these micro IP cores on FPGA tools like on Proteus ISIS.

 

[samcheetah]

would like to know wad is the limitation on PIC n uC...

i hav learn 8051... n assembly language is terrible...

so far.. i hav heard tht the instruction on PIC like BASIC language is very simple to learn but it has only limited function,,, true?

but the HDL language in digital design is superb.. very flexible...

and i think the uC n PIC is the "microprogrammed" type & the FPGA stuff are "hardwired" type... am i correct?

so generally, hardwired is faster than the microprogrammed.. true?.. this is wad i read in a book... so actually wad is the "faster" mean?.. is it tht the FPGA stuff can support higher frequency clk so the sequential circuits design can b run faster?

the limitation on microcontrollers is from where you see it. you can do many (and i mean MANY) things on a microcontroller. microcontrollers are only limited by your creativity and imagination.

as far as the assembly language of 8051 is concerned, well i liked the instruction set of 8051 because i had studied the instruction set of 8085 previously. and yes the PIC instruction set is very easy (only 35 instructions to remember) but i dont know if it is BASIC-like. and certainly it doesnt have limited functionality. if you have studied RISC architechture then you would know that RICS microcontrollers have a smaller (usually) instruction set so you have to write more lines of code than what you would write for a CISC based microcontroller. but in return you get the advantages of pipelining and ease of remembering all the instructions of the instruction set. anyway this is a long debate that has been going on for ages

microcontrollers are different from FPGAs in that in an FPGA you have bare logic in the form of CLBs (Xilinx) and you can implement any logic function on those CLBs. whereas in microcontrollers you have a hardware that is capable of performing some tasks. in an FPGA you can implement an FIR filter then a viterbi encoder and then a microprocessor core and so on. but you cant do this in an FPGA.

you have to read the architechtures of both FPGAs and microcontrollers and then you will understand the differences.

and as far as speed is concerned, yes FPGAs are faster than microcontrollers because you can acheive a very high level of parallelism in FPGAs. you can do many tasks at the same time on an FPGA depending on your verilog code

i hope that helps

 

[sp]

thank samcheetah again for the useful sharing...

i read every words of urs carefully...

regarding the PIC code language... there are few types tht is easier than the assembly code.... the BASIC PRO, BASIC STAMP... i am not really sure on the name,,, i read through it only last time... it also can use the assembly language but using this assembly is really hard (for me)...

in my opinion, using the FPGA/CPLD is really flexible... u wanna create what controller then u just write the hardware n u get the controller... but the uC/PIC are unable to do the same thing.... and the price on the CPLD/FPGA is quite low now (large volume)... Altera MAX family even reaches USD1.00 per chip....

another thing is tht the HDL is very portable now... very useful as well,,,, true?... learn one language n u can do the digital controller already... but this is not the case wth PIC/uC... like PIC,,, only one company is doing it(true?),,, microchip.. n the language is chip dependance.... uC as well... i think the assembly language also has diff types...

actually i just wanna know more bout uC/PIC capability,,, i am not wanting to make the uC look bad anyway..

i am using the CPLD/FPGA stuffs more, i tried 8051 b4, it is really troublesome... i am a student anyway...

regards,
sp

 

[IanP]

Brother, toss a coin ..
Regards,
IanP