Searching \ for 'Compare AVR to PIC(was ATMEL)' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: techref.massmind.org/techref/microchip/devices.htm?key=pic
Search entire site for: 'Compare AVR to PIC(was ATMEL)'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'Compare AVR to PIC(was ATMEL)'
1998\07\08@011903 by Jerry Meng

flavicon
face
Yes, personally I think AVR is much better than PIC.
Nice instruction set, support X,Y,Z index for RAM
accessing or ROM table looking upMore the pin
is compatible with 89C2051, 89C51 except the
RESET is active low.

AT90S1200 is similar to 16F84, but the code size
is 0.5K, though it has a 1K byte flash. more 1200
has a internal analog comparator.

AT90S2313 has 1K code size, but it also have a
UART, a Output compare and a Input capture or
PWM. 128 bytes RAM, 128 bytes internal EEPROM.

Now ATMEL also supply a AT90S8535/4434 which has
8 10bits AD. AT90S2323/2343 which is only 8 pin.

The speed if using same frequency clock, it is about
4 times faster than PI. So I can program a 90S2313
with 4MHz crystal as a slave I2C device(100KHz SCL)

Once I used PIC16C63 for my design, now I change
to AT90S8515, price is little bit higher than PIC, but
due to the internal EEPROM, I saved the cost of 24C02,
the cost is almost the same.

I don't think you need to purchase the ATMEL
AVR programmer, I built a very low cost one,
which is powered by PC printer port, you only
need to wiring to AVR. The software of my programmer
is Free! You can download via following link:
http://www.qsl.net/ba1fb

Regards

Jerry

At 10:49 PM 7/7/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Would anyone like to say anything nice/unkind about
>Atmel AVR devices?
>
>I've been checked out their website, and they seem to be
>similar to the 16F84, except more powerful and cheaper.
>
>Atmel also has a deal for a $50 programmer/dev. kit.
>
>

1998\07\08@030112 by NCS Products

flavicon
face
At 01:14 PM 7/8/98 +0900, you wrote:

>I don't think you need to purchase the ATMEL
>AVR programmer, I built a very low cost one,
>which is powered by PC printer port, you only
>need to wiring to AVR. The software of my programmer
>is Free! You can download via following link:
>http://www.qsl.net/ba1fb


Very nicely done program!

Thanks.  I might build your programmer from parts laying around.

The $50 Atmel deal is both a programmer and a little evaluation board,
with LEDs and Switches for output/input, also a rs232 port on board, etc.

1998\07\08@044752 by Steve Lawther

flavicon
face
    Yep,

    As much as I like PICs, I've found that recently for high-end
stuff,
    they haven't tended  to meet the requirements (without trade-offs)
    whereas the AVRs have sometimes fitted like a glove.

    The main selling points (for me):-

    Reprogramable in situ (via SPI bus), fast cycle time (not having a
4
    times clock radiating to the world), the E2, the slightly easier
code
    writing, the price, 3PWMs.

    Downers include the number of instructions fitted in, being half of

    the headline memory bytes value, and incompatible pinout between
the
    4414 and 4434.

    All this said, I'll be sticking to the 12C508 for low end stuff,
    totally on price.


       Steve Lawther


______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: Re: Compare AVR to PIC(was ATMEL)
Author:  Jerry Meng [SMTP:spam_OUTjerrymTakeThisOuTspamPUBLIC.GB.COM.CN]  at UKExchange
Date:    08/07/98 05:14


Yes, personally I think AVR is much better than PIC.
Nice instruction set, support X,Y,Z index for RAM
accessing or ROM table looking upMore the pin
is compatible with 89C2051, 89C51 except the
RESET is active low.

AT90S1200 is similar to 16F84, but the code size
is 0.5K, though it has a 1K byte flash. more 1200
has a internal analog comparator.

AT90S2313 has 1K code size, but it also have a
UART, a Output compare and a Input capture or
PWM. 128 bytes RAM, 128 bytes internal EEPROM.

Now ATMEL also supply a AT90S8535/4434 which has
8 10bits AD. AT90S2323/2343 which is only 8 pin.

The speed if using same frequency clock, it is about
4 times faster than PI. So I can program a 90S2313
with 4MHz crystal as a slave I2C device(100KHz SCL)

Once I used PIC16C63 for my design, now I change
to AT90S8515, price is little bit higher than PIC, but
due to the internal EEPROM, I saved the cost of 24C02,
the cost is almost the same.

I don't think you need to purchase the ATMEL
AVR programmer, I built a very low cost one,
which is powered by PC printer port, you only
need to wiring to AVR. The software of my programmer
is Free! You can download via following link:
http://www.qsl.net/ba1fb

Regards

Jerry

At 10:49 PM 7/7/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Would anyone like to say anything nice/unkind about
>Atmel AVR devices?
>
>I've been checked out their website, and they seem to be
>similar to the 16F84, except more powerful and cheaper.
>
>Atmel also has a deal for a $50 programmer/dev. kit.
>
>

1998\07\08@105210 by Ivan Cenov

flavicon
face
Hi,

Yes, PIC are very fast, with tight code.
But when the program grows up with many functions
and many variables the situation tends to go out of control
(if one writes in assembler). The bad moment comes
when you should move variables from PR0 to RP1
or program from PP0 to PP1.
so I think that for small projects, without sophisticated user interface
PICs are OK.
If there is string manipulation (UI has that) with strings in program memory
the situation becomes boring.
Simply imagine:
strcmp(string1, string2); and string is in RAM and string2 is in EPROM.
or
showError(errorMsgIndex); and array of messages is in EPROM.

Ivan Cenov
.....okto7KILLspamspam@spam@botev.ttm.bg
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Network/9276/

{Original Message removed}

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1998 , 1999 only
- Today
- New search...