32-bit RICS Embedded MicroProcessors
Dan Wilson
I work for a company that is starting a new development project using a 32-bit
RISC microprocessor. We have started analyzing the various processors
available, and have rejected a few outright, but have come down to 5
processors that we are investigating further. These are Intel i960 H series,
Fujitsu Sparc Lite (MB86935), Digital's StrongARM, the PowerPC, and the 860.
Does anyone who has used these processors have pros/cons to advise? We are
concerned about actual MIPS versus manufacturer's stated MIPS, errata, other
gotchas in using the component, software tools (robustness, how buggy, vendor
support, etc), and any other issues that help influence whether the project is
helped or hindered by processor issues. We have a team working on these
points, but nothing beats the wisdom of experience!
Thanks!
Dan Wilson.
Wayland Sothcott
Dan,
The ARM chip has been successfull for years, Acorn, Apple and Psion use it
in their Computers and peripherals. The StrongARM is a newer version.
SGS-Thompson have the Transputer, also used in peripherals and has the
advantage that you can network a whole load together to make a parrallel
processor.However SGS-Thompson support is poor. Ie their PIC buster was
better than a PIC but the IDE had too many bugs.
Regards,
Wayland.
Dan Wilson <dwi...@vcnet.com> wrote in article
<5hcj33$k...@news.vcnet.com>...
Christopher Pinkard
We are looking at all of them. We have benchmarked several.
The SA-100 (StrongArm) is the best bang for the buck in my
opinion, and has the Footbridge PCI interface chip and a
good roadmap. At 1 watt for 230 MIPS, it is ideal for
embedded products. I don't like working with 16 registers
(actually only 13 available) though.
IDT 4640 is also strong in bang/buck. The best vaporware processor
looks like the NEC 5400. We are also evaluating the new
TI C60.
--
----------------------------------------------------
Chris Pinkard Sr. Staff SW Design Engineer
KLA Instruments Corp. RAPID Engineering
cpin...@falcon.kla.com 408-468-4346
Brian J Schaufenbuel
In article <5hcj33$k...@news.vcnet.com>, dwi...@vcnet.com wrote:
>I work for a company that is starting a new development project using a 32-bit
>RISC microprocessor. We have started analyzing the various processors
>available, and have rejected a few outright, but have come down to 5
>processors that we are investigating further. These are Intel i960 H series,
>Fujitsu Sparc Lite (MB86935), Digital's StrongARM, the PowerPC, and the 860.
Have you looked at the Hitachi SH series? Looks very interesting at first
glance.
- Brian J Schaufenbuel
sch...@iastate.edu
Austin Franklin
Chris,
> IDT 4640 is also strong in bang/buck.
We are using the 4640. We evaluated all the aforementioned processors, and
have used most of them in previous projects, and have now chosen the 4640
for our current and future processor.
The 4640 is definately the best bang for the buck, and the easiest to use.
It has no fancy frills (like (non-working - 960) DMAs) which is what we
wanted, since we have FPGAs/CPLD that is doing our DMA and other interface
functions (PCI interface, Telecom interface). The only problem I have had
with the 4640 is the lack of reasonably priced emulators. The software
support is excellent, they have a very good demo/development board, and the
GNU tools are provided by IDT for free! The work quite well. I have no
regrets or complaints.
Austin Franklin
..dark...@ix.netcom.com.
Leon Heller
In article <01bc3c88$8eba8ae0$d449bacd@drt1>, Austin Franklin
<#dark...@ix.netcom.com#> writes
>Chris,
>
>> IDT 4640 is also strong in bang/buck.
>
>We are using the 4640. We evaluated all the aforementioned processors, and
>have used most of them in previous projects, and have now chosen the 4640
>for our current and future processor.
>
>The 4640 is definately the best bang for the buck, and the easiest to use.
>It has no fancy frills (like (non-working - 960) DMAs)
What exactly is this problem with the i960 DMA? I'm playing about with
the i960SA for my own amazement at home. I probably won't be using DMA,
anyway.
Leon
--
Leon Heller
Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
Email: le...@lfheller.demon.co.uk http://www.lfheller.demon.co.uk
Tel: +44 (0) 118 947 1424 (home) +44 (0) 1344 385556 (work)
timo...@cyberramp.net
>Dan Wilson <dwi...@vcnet.com> wrote in article
><5hcj33$k...@news.vcnet.com>...
>> I work for a company that is starting a new development project using a
>32-bit
>> RISC microprocessor. We have started analyzing the various processors
>> available, and have rejected a few outright, but have come down to 5
>> processors that we are investigating further. These are Intel i960 H
>series,
The i960 processors are quite good, as is the support from Intel. We
use the JA series processors, and are happy with them. The H would
surely deliver some good performance for you.
Stuart Clubb
>We are looking at all of them. We have benchmarked several.
>The SA-100 (StrongArm) is the best bang for the buck in my
>opinion, and has the Footbridge PCI interface chip and a
>good roadmap. At 1 watt for 230 MIPS, it is ideal for
>embedded products. I don't like working with 16 registers
>(actually only 13 available) though.
Digital Semiconductor SA-110 (StrongARM)
Part number Speed MIPS P(typ) P(max) Price 1Kup
21281-BA 100MHz 115 <110 <300 £21.12
21281-AA 160MHz 185 <136 <450 £36.24
21281-CA 200MHz 230 n/a <900 £31.23
21281-EA 233MHz 268 n/a <1000 £36.24
100MHz, and 160MHz parts have sleep & idle modes, taking power to sub
100 microwatts and 20 microwatts respectively.
MIPS is Dhrystone V2.1.
Power is in microwatts.
Pricing is in UK Pounds sterling and is a landed price. (Duty &
Freight paid). Anyone get any better?
Stuart
Stuart Clubb
On 29 Mar 1997 21:32:04 GMT, "Austin Franklin"
<#dark...@ix.netcom.com#> wrote:
>The 4640 is definately the best bang for the buck, and the easiest to use.
<Snip>
Please define best bang for the buck.
Stuart
Gregor Glawitsch
In article <5hcj33$k...@news.vcnet.com>, dwi...@vcnet.com (Dan Wilson) says:
>
>I work for a company that is starting a new development project using a 32-bit
>RISC microprocessor. We have started analyzing the various processors
>available, and have rejected a few outright, but have come down to 5
>processors that we are investigating further. These are Intel i960 H series,
>
>concerned about actual MIPS versus manufacturer's stated MIPS, errata, other
>gotchas in using the component, software tools (robustness, how buggy, vendor
>support, etc), and any other issues that help influence whether the project is
>helped or hindered by processor issues. We have a team working on these
>points, but nothing beats the wisdom of experience!
From my experience with the i960, back in 1991/1992, and the 16-bit 80C196
(1991 to 1994) I suggest that you place more emphasis on a fast, reliable
C compiler than on the price or performance of the microcontroller itself.
The C compiler and the linker for i960 were so slow, that we
wound up with a compile/link time of over one hour for our project,
while mainstream (workstation, PC) compilers were an order of
magnitude faster (for source code of the same project).
The Intel C compiler for the 80C196 was so buggy (forgetting to pop
compiler internal scratch variables off the stack which were pushed on
the stack some instructions before, and so on) that it made brave men
weep. I literally lost several days in hunting down compiler bugs.
I'd suggest going for embedded processors like Sparc Lite or PowerPC
which are code compatible to processors used in workstations. Thus
you can use mainstream workstation compilers (SUN, IBM) and don't have
to rely on the dubious quality of crosscompilers for exotic
microcontrollers.
Just my two cents worth...
Gregor Glawitsch | Tel: ++43 (0)732 655 755 - 33
Utimaco Safe Concept GmbH | Fax: ++43 (0)732 655 755 - 5
Europaplatz 6 | email (office): Gregor.G...@utimaco.co.at
A-4020 Linz, Austria | email (home) : Gregor.G...@magnet.at
Stuart Clubb
On Sun, 30 Mar 1997 20:26:38 GMT, s_c...@netcomuk.co.uk (Stuart
Clubb) wrote:
>Power is in microwatts.
Ooops, should have said milliwatts :-)
Stuart
John Beaton
Dan Wilson wrote:
>
> I work for a company that is starting a new development project using a 32-bit
> RISC microprocessor. We have started analyzing the various processors
> available, and have rejected a few outright, but have come down to 5
> processors that we are investigating further. These are Intel i960 H series,
> Fujitsu Sparc Lite (MB86935), Digital's StrongARM, the PowerPC, and the 860.
>
> Does anyone who has used these processors have pros/cons to advise? We are
> concerned about actual MIPS versus manufacturer's stated MIPS, errata, other
> gotchas in using the component, software tools (robustness, how buggy, vendor
> support, etc), and any other issues that help influence whether the project is
> helped or hindered by processor issues. We have a team working on these
> points, but nothing beats the wisdom of experience!
>
>
> Dan Wilson.Dan - I'd suggest looking at the total system cost and the lifecycle costs -
support chips, 3rd party software, development tools, off-the-shelf boards &
modules, availability of people who know a particular architecture etc. Also, make
sure that whatever processor you use will be around for the long haul - Michael
Slater's "Microprocessor Reports" newsletter has some great info on this
(www.chipanalyst.com). I noticed your list didn't include Pentiums - they're the
highest volume 32-bit processor shipping.
Cheers,
JDB
Austin Franklin
Stuart Clubb <s_c...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote in article
<333ecca0....@nntp.netcruiser>...
133MIPs (which is application dependent). It runs at 133MHz (33MHz
external, 4x internal), and is a RISC (single cycle instructions, and large
register file)...and it is under $40. That's pretty good
bang-for-the-buck!
Austin Franklin
..dark...@ix.netcom.com.
Austin Franklin
> I noticed your list didn't include Pentiums - they're the
> highest volume 32-bit processor shipping.
They're also quite expensive compared to a 4640 or an ARM. Like $40 vs
$150+...
Austin Franklin
..dark...@ix.netcom.com.
StevensTA
> I work for a company that is starting a new development project using a
32-bit
> RISC microprocessor. We have started analyzing the various processors
> available, and have rejected a few outright, but have come down to 5
> processors that we are investigating further. These are Intel i960 H
series,
> Fujitsu Sparc Lite (MB86935), Digital's StrongARM, the PowerPC, and the
860.
>
> Does anyone who has used these processors have pros/cons to advise? We
are
> concerned about actual MIPS versus manufacturer's stated MIPS, errata,
other
> gotchas in using the component, software tools (robustness, how buggy,
vendor
> support, etc), and any other issues that help influence whether the
project is
> helped or hindered by processor issues. We have a team working on these
> points, but nothing beats the wisdom of experience!
I had thought that Intel announced that support for the i960 processors
was going
to be discontinued 4Q 98? If anyone can correct me, it would be
appreciated.
The PowerPC family seems to be well supported in terms of 3rd party
support, and
there are two sources (IBM and Motorola) with all sorts of packages
available with
various IO/MMU functions etcetera. Currently, I think the PPC 603, has
floating-point
capabilites and a reasonably low power consumption.
The Pentium ($200+ depending on what flavor and accompanying chipset to
handle IO
and Memory interfaces) is a bit pricey and dissapates a whole lot of
power, and is
tricky to work with (IMHO) in an embedded environement.
The websites have quite a bit of good info, in particular motorola.com,
ibm.com
(PPC) and intel.com (Pentium).
Yet another family of chip to consider would be the Mips chips. There are
several
licensed manufacturers, each with their own flavor, but again, most have
pretty
reasonable computational power and low power consumption. Check out
mips.com
for the complete list of manufacturers, and I would recommend looking for
info on
the NEC R4100 (no FPU) and the R4300 processors (nec.com). IDT also makes
a number of these devices (idt.com)
Enjoy,
Todd Stevens
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new
discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I found it!) but "That's funny ..."
-- Isaac Asimov
Speak softly and carry a +6 two-handed sword.
Todd Stevens
stev...@aol.com
12209 NE 130th Way, M304 (206) 814-9297
(h)
Kirkland, WA 98034 (206) 885-8597
(w)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Austin Franklin
> The i960 processors are quite good, as is the support from Intel. We
> use the JA series processors, and are happy with them. The H would
> surely deliver some good performance for you.
The i960 is expensive, depending on which core you use...the CA is pretty
expensive. There are some cost reduced versions, but they aren't really
that fast.... I've used them on two projects, and wasn't impressed.
See this URL for 960 processors available:
http://developer.intel.com/design/i960/#A8
And this one for prices:
http://developer.intel.com/design/pricelst/32BMP.htm
And see this for 4640 'brief'
http://www.idt.com/cgi-bin/psq.pl?mkokey=risc
or here for full spec on the 4640:
http://www.idt.com/cgi-bin/dsq.pl?docidkey=3486
Austin Franklin
..dark...@ix.netcom.com.
Torben AEgidius Mogensen
dwi...@vcnet.com (Dan Wilson) writes:
>I work for a company that is starting a new development project using a 32-bit
>RISC microprocessor. We have started analyzing the various processors
>available, and have rejected a few outright, but have come down to 5
>processors that we are investigating further. These are Intel i960 H series,
>Fujitsu Sparc Lite (MB86935), Digital's StrongARM, the PowerPC, and the 860.
>Does anyone who has used these processors have pros/cons to advise? We are
>concerned about actual MIPS versus manufacturer's stated MIPS, errata, other
>gotchas in using the component, software tools (robustness, how buggy, vendor
>support, etc), and any other issues that help influence whether the project is
>helped or hindered by processor issues. We have a team working on these
>points, but nothing beats the wisdom of experience!
The StrongARM gives you very good performace for a small price and low
power consumption. The development tools are said to be excellent and
you have a choice of compilers (gcc or ARMs own C/C++ compiler). There
is a free downloadable toolset containing an ARM emulator, gcc and a
debugger.
There are also a number of support chips availbale and some highly
integrated chips that contain ARM CPU together with video/LCD and i/o
controllers etc. These, however, don't use the StrongARM core (yet),
so are limited to around 40 MHz. There is at the moment no FP hardware
available for the StrongARM (but there is ARM7500FE which has a 40MHz
ARM7 core, FP hardware and various controllers on a single chip).
Torben Mogensen (tor...@diku.dk)
Dave Hansen
On 31 Mar 1997 12:17:33 GMT, gregor.g...@utimaco.co.at (Gregor
Glawitsch) wrote:
>
>From my experience with the i960, back in 1991/1992, and the 16-bit 80C196
>(1991 to 1994) I suggest that you place more emphasis on a fast, reliable
>C compiler than on the price or performance of the microcontroller itself.
>
This is good advice.
>
>The C compiler and the linker for i960 were so slow, that we
>wound up with a compile/link time of over one hour for our project,
>while mainstream (workstation, PC) compilers were an order of
>magnitude faster (for source code of the same project).
I've used the GNU compiler for the i960 (in 1996), and found it fast
and reliable. I didn't really investigate the generated code to see
if the optimizations were good, but it was fast enough for me. Both
Cygnus and Intel provide these.
Regards,
-=Dave
dha...@btree.com
I can barely speak for myself. I certainly can't speak for B-Tree
Christopher Pinkard
>
> I had thought that Intel announced that support for the i960 processors
> was going
> to be discontinued 4Q 98? If anyone can correct me, it would be
> appreciated.
>
A special i960 will be on most wintel servers by the end of
this year, and on high-end wintel workstations next year. It is
a high performance I/O channel processor now, like in the old
mainframe days. It has a pci bridge. All device drivers need
only be written for the ixWorks (scaled down VxWorks) operating
system that will run on it, and once they work and conform to
the "I2O" intelligent i/o protocol, may never have to be written
again (if you believe the marketing guys). This is one of the
big moves to checkmate motherboard manufacturers and drive the
remaining few to their knees.
You can get info from intel and wind rivers websites. Because
of this development, wind rivers' stock blew through the roof
recently, and I've started to look at it as a good candidate for
one of our applications, since the volume of production should
keep prices down.
Stuart Clubb
On 1 Apr 1997 01:00:47 GMT, "Austin Franklin"
<#dark...@ix.netcom.com#> wrote:
>133MIPs (which is application dependent). It runs at 133MHz (33MHz
>external, 4x internal), and is a RISC (single cycle instructions, and large
>register file)...and it is under $40. That's pretty good
>bang-for-the-buck!
Agree. I make that 3.325 MIPS/$, but what quantity?
21281-CA (200 MHz, 230 MIPS) $50 1K up => 4.6 MIPS/$
21281-BA (100 MHz, 115 MIPS) $33 1K up => 3.5 MIPS/$
Prices are UK including Freight & Duty, and $:Ł of 1.6
In the US? Any clues?
Stuart
Christopher Pinkard
Torben AEgidius Mogensen wrote:
>
> The StrongARM gives you very good performace for a small price and low
> power consumption. The development tools are said to be excellent and
> you have a choice of compilers (gcc or ARMs own C/C++ compiler). There
> is a free downloadable toolset containing an ARM emulator, gcc and a
> debugger.
>
> There are also a number of support chips availbale and some highly
> integrated chips that contain ARM CPU together with video/LCD and i/o
> controllers etc. These, however, don't use the StrongARM core (yet),
> so are limited to around 40 MHz. There is at the moment no FP hardware
> available for the StrongARM (but there is ARM7500FE which has a 40MHz
> ARM7 core, FP hardware and various controllers on a single chip).
>
> Torben Mogensen (tor...@diku.dk)
The strongarm is great, and I believe they will be able to reach
internal clock speeds over 350MHz and external bus interface speeds
of 100MHz in the not too distant future. They have 16K/16K instr/data
cache that is 32-way set associative. They have got 8 write-back
buffers that make a measurable difference (you can turn them off
and measure). The "footbridge" is the only interface part you
need for memory and PCI access, as well has having 4 dma channels
and other goodies. The only drawback I've run into while optimizing
ARM code and benchmarking is the lack of registers - only 13 are
usable, whereas most RISC like 4640 give you 29 usable. You have
to jump through some hoops to optimize, but we have gotten excellent
results.
Jonathan Kirwan
>> I had thought that Intel announced that support for the i960 processors
>> was going
>> to be discontinued 4Q 98? If anyone can correct me, it would be
>> appreciated.
>A special i960 will be on most wintel servers by the end of
>this year, and on high-end wintel workstations next year. It is
>a high performance I/O channel processor now, like in the old
>mainframe days. It has a pci bridge. All device drivers need
>only be written for the ixWorks (scaled down VxWorks) operating
>system that will run on it, and once they work and conform to
>the "I2O" intelligent i/o protocol, may never have to be written
>again (if you believe the marketing guys). This is one of the
>big moves to checkmate motherboard manufacturers and drive the
>remaining few to their knees.
i960RP, I suspect. If so, I've used boards with them.
Jon
Mike D
Dave Hansen <dha...@btree.com> wrote in article
<33412cfa...@192.168.2.34>...
I agree with Dave. The GNU 960 compiler has been excellent though a little
slow, and I have scrutinized the optmized code on a regular basis. I found
the optimization to be some of the best I have seen in an emebedded system.
Mike Dudgeon
Principal Engineer
Radiant Systems
mdud...@radiantsystems.com
Gadi Friedman
In article <5hoa0t$17...@alijku04.edvz.uni-linz.ac.at> gregor.g...@utimaco.co.at (Gregor Glawitsch) writes:
>In article <5hcj33$k...@news.vcnet.com>, dwi...@vcnet.com (Dan Wilson) says:
>>
>>RISC microprocessor. We have started analyzing the various processors
>>available, and have rejected a few outright, but have come down to 5
>>processors that we are investigating further. These are Intel i960 H series,
>>Fujitsu Sparc Lite (MB86935), Digital's StrongARM, the PowerPC, and the 860.
>>
>>Does anyone who has used these processors have pros/cons to advise? We are
>>concerned about actual MIPS versus manufacturer's stated MIPS, errata, other
>>gotchas in using the component, software tools (robustness, how buggy, vendor
>>support, etc), and any other issues that help influence whether the project is
>>helped or hindered by processor issues. We have a team working on these
>>points, but nothing beats the wisdom of experience!
>
We are currently using the I960CF, but for our next project, we
are probably moving over to the Motorola 860. The 860 is cheaper,
and OS support is cheaper, (pSos for the Motorola 860 vs VxWorks for the
i960). For our applications, the I960HD was only about 10% faster than
then the I960CF.
Cheers,
Gadi