[PIC] New small Micro family from Microchip?
Alan B. Pearce
14 pin package.
seems to be a RISC architecture - says it has a 'highly symmetrical
instruction set', but no instruction set listed in data sheet.
claims to have a C compiler available.
Appears to have a 2 clock time instruction cycle with pipeline, instead of
the 4 clock time instruction cycle of the base and midrange PIC devices.
20MHz max clock speed.
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
Jan-Erik Soderholm
> datasheet at http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/41338B.pdf
>
> 14 pin package.
>
> seems to be a RISC architecture - says it has a 'highly symmetrical
> instruction set', but no instruction set listed in data sheet.
>
> claims to have a C compiler available.
>
> Appears to have a 2 clock time instruction cycle with pipeline, instead of
> the 4 clock time instruction cycle of the base and midrange PIC devices.
Not according to the linked datasheet. See fig 2-2 on p.10.
It also says "All instructions are single cycle (200 ?s)
except for program branches, which take two cycles"
I guess that 200 us ahould be 200 ns, and that is 5 MIPS witch
match a 4 phase cycle @ 20 MHz.
It looks very similiar to the (old) base-line arch...
Jan-Erik.
Wouter van Ooijen
> seems to be a RISC architecture - says it has a 'highly symmetrical
> instruction set', but no instruction set listed in data sheet.
The example code fragments and memory layout suggest a 12-bit core. Not
exactly 'hot'. Let's see what the price will be (when it becomes available).
--
Wouter van Ooijen
-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: www.voti.nl/hvu
William "Chops" Westfield
On Jul 8, 2009, at 1:58 AM, Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> datasheet at http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/
> 41338B.pdf
> :
> Appears to have a 2 clock time instruction cycle with pipeline,
> instead of
> the 4 clock time instruction cycle of the base and midrange PIC
> devices.
Where did you get that part? It looks to me as though the timing
diagrams in Figure 2-2 and example 2-1 look exactly like the similar
diagrams (3-3 and 3-1) from the pic10f manual, and the 'block diagram'
looks identical compared to the 16F506...
(hmm. Except for 64x8 of "flash data memory.")
BillW
cdb
:: It also says "All instructions are single cycle (200 ?s)
:: except for program branches, which take two cycles"
The data sheet on page 3 definitely says:
Operating Speed:
DC - 20 MHz crystal oscillator
DC - 200ns instruction cycle
Colin
--
cdb, co...@btech-online.co.uk on 8/07/2009
Web presence: www.btech-online.co.uk
Hosted by: www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=7988359
Tamas Rudnai
> The example code fragments and memory layout suggest a 12-bit core. Not
> exactly 'hot'. Let's see what the price will be (when it becomes
> available).
Yep, the doc it clearly states that:
It employs a RISC
architecture with only 33 single-word/single-cycle
instructions. All instructions are single cycle (200 μs)
except for program branches, which take two cycles.
The MCV14A device delivers performance an order of
magnitude higher than their competitors in the same
price category. The 12-bit wide instructions are highly
symmetrical, resulting in a typical 2:1 code compres-
sion over other 8-bit microcontrollers in its class.
Tamas
>
>
> --
>
> Wouter van Ooijen
>
> -- -------------------------------------------
> Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
> consultancy, development, PICmicro products
> docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: www.voti.nl/hvu
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
Rob Hamerling
>> Appears to have a 2 clock time instruction cycle with pipeline, instead of
>> the 4 clock time instruction cycle of the base and midrange PIC devices.
>
Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
> Not according to the linked datasheet. See fig 2-2 on p.10.
>
> It also says "All instructions are single cycle (200 ?s)
> except for program branches, which take two cycles"
>
> I guess that 200 us ahould be 200 ns, and that is 5 MIPS witch
> match a 4 phase cycle @ 20 MHz.
>
It's the overlap of instruction fetching and execution which
*effectively* doubles the speed (compared to non-overlapping).
See Exampe 2-1 on page 10
> It looks very similiar to the (old) base-line arch...
Indeed, the 10Fs, 16f506, etc have the same timing pictures
Regards, Rob.
--
Rob Hamerling, Vianen, NL (http://www.robh.nl/)
Ravi
> Where did you get that part? It looks to me as though the timing
> diagrams in Figure 2-2 and example 2-1 look exactly like the similar
> diagrams (3-3 and 3-1) from the pic10f manual, and the 'block diagram'
> looks identical compared to the 16F506...
> (hmm. Except for 64x8 of "flash data memory.")
Something similar to 16F526, 14 pins, 1024 flash, 67 SRAM and 64 Flash
(bytes).
Ravi
Jan-Erik Soderholm
>
>
>
>
>>> Appears to have a 2 clock time instruction cycle with pipeline, instead of
>>> the 4 clock time instruction cycle of the base and midrange PIC devices.
> Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
>> Not according to the linked datasheet. See fig 2-2 on p.10.
>
>> It also says "All instructions are single cycle (200 ?s)
>> except for program branches, which take two cycles"
>>
>> I guess that 200 us ahould be 200 ns, and that is 5 MIPS witch
>> match a 4 phase cycle @ 20 MHz.
>>
>
> It's the overlap of instruction fetching and execution which
> *effectively* doubles the speed (compared to non-overlapping).
> See Exampe 2-1 on page 10
Douples compared to what ?
Ravi
> The data sheet on page 3 definitely says:
> Operating Speed:
> DC - 20 MHz crystal oscillator
> DC - 200ns instruction cycle
Comparing page 3 of 16F526 and MCV14, there is no difference.
Ravi
Jan-Erik Soderholm
Rob Hamerling
> Rob Hamerling wrote:
>> It's the overlap of instruction fetching and execution which
>> *effectively* doubles the speed (compared to non-overlapping).
>> See Exampe 2-1 on page 10
Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
> Douples compared to what ?
As I said: 'compared to non-overlapping'. Fetch/execution overlapping
seems to be standard in the baseline, unlike in the midrange.
Regards, Rob.
--
Rob Hamerling, Vianen, NL (http://www.robh.nl/)
Tamas Rudnai
16F628 datasheet Section 3.2
Tamas
Tamas Rudnai
jan-erik....@telia.com> wrote:
> And why that "funny" name on the device ?
I guess MC is for MicroChip, 14 is the number of pins -- have no clue about
V and A -- A could be a version number though similar to how it was used
already for variations (like the 16F628A)?
Tamas
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
Jan-Erik Soderholm
Rob Hamerling wrote:
>> Rob Hamerling wrote:
>>> It's the overlap of instruction fetching and execution which
>>> *effectively* doubles the speed (compared to non-overlapping).
>>> See Exampe 2-1 on page 10
>
> Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
>> Douples compared to what ?
>
> As I said: 'compared to non-overlapping'. Fetch/execution overlapping
> seems to be standard in the baseline, unlike in the midrange.
>
> Regards, Rob.
I compared the new (?) MCV14A, the PIC10-series and the PIC16F628A
datasheets. They all have the same timing diagrams. The next fetch
is done while the former instuction executes in all three cases.
Nothing "doubles".
Jan-Erik.
Xiaofan Chen
> datasheet at http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/41338B.pdf
>
> 14 pin package.
>
This device has been out in China for a while. So called MCVxx is only
provided to big customers. They are the low cost version. And it seems
to be similar to the old CF745/765 which means that they may not
be tested thoroughly in Microchip facility but will be tested
in the large customer site. They are not supposed to be in the mass market.
From:
http://forum.esm-cn.com/FORUM_POST_1000164019_1200339532_0.HTM
MCV18A can replace PIC16F54 CF745
MCV28A can replace PIC16F57 CF775
MCV08A can replace PIC12F508 PIC12F510 PIC12F629
MCV14A can replace PIC16C505 PIC16F526 PIC16F630
If you compare MCV14A with PIC16F526, you may find them
almost exactly the same (less packaging option)
http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/41326B.pdf
--
Xiaofan http://mcuee.blogspot.com
Rob Hamerling
Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
>>>> It's the overlap of instruction fetching and execution which
>>>> *effectively* doubles the speed (compared to non-overlapping).
>>>> See Exampe 2-1 on page 10
>> Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
>>> Douples compared to what ?
>> As I said: 'compared to non-overlapping'. Fetch/execution overlapping
>> seems to be standard in the baseline, unlike in the midrange.
>>
>> Regards, Rob.
>
> I compared the new (?) MCV14A, the PIC10-series and the PIC16F628A
> datasheets. They all have the same timing diagrams. The next fetch
> is done while the former instuction executes in all three cases.
>
> Nothing "doubles".
Indeed, I had interpreted the figures wrongly! Sorry!
Regards, Rob.
--
Rob Hamerling, Vianen, NL (http://www.robh.nl/)
Ravi
> This device has been out in China for a while. So called MCVxx is only
> provided to big customers. They are the low cost version. And it seems
> to be similar to the old CF745/765 which means that they may not
> be tested thoroughly in Microchip facility but will be tested
> in the large customer site. They are not supposed to be in the mass market.
>
> From:
> http://forum.esm-cn.com/FORUM_POST_1000164019_1200339532_0.HTM
> MCV18A can replace PIC16F54 CF745
> MCV28A can replace PIC16F57 CF775
> MCV08A can replace PIC12F508 PIC12F510 PIC12F629
> MCV14A can replace PIC16C505 PIC16F526 PIC16F630
Xiaofan, you are right, I just got this confirmed. This is supplied to
NON CRITICAL applications market since the testing is not done
thoroughly and hence it is priced low to beat the competition.
The minimum volume shipments are 200K.
Ravi
Isaac Marino Bavaresco
> Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
>
>
>>>>> It's the overlap of instruction fetching and execution which
>>>>> *effectively* doubles the speed (compared to non-overlapping).
>>>>> See Exampe 2-1 on page 10
>>>>>
>>> Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
>>>
>>>> Douples compared to what ?
>>>>
>>> As I said: 'compared to non-overlapping'. Fetch/execution overlapping
>>> seems to be standard in the baseline, unlike in the midrange.
>>>
>>> Regards, Rob.
>>>
>> I compared the new (?) MCV14A, the PIC10-series and the PIC16F628A
>> datasheets. They all have the same timing diagrams. The next fetch
>> is done while the former instuction executes in all three cases.
>>
>> Nothing "doubles".
>>
>
> Indeed, I had interpreted the figures wrongly! Sorry!
>
> Regards, Rob.
>
It appears that they stripped some bits off the core. The data address
range is just 128 bytes, perhaps the architecture doesn't have provision
for more. The program address bus may have been reduced also, to allow
just the 1K instructions.
This way they could save silicon area and make the chip cheaper.
Regards,
Isaac
__________________________________________________
Faça ligações para outros computadores com o novo Yahoo! Messenger
http://br.beta.messenger.yahoo.com/
Bob Axtell
--Bob
Russell McMahon
MCV08a, 14a, 18a, 28a
HA2089, 2099, 3089, 3099
HA2089 datasheet
http://www.enroo.com/uploaddir/Microchip/Secure%20Data/Chinese%20Translated%20Documents/HA2089.pdf
HA2099
Competence in written Chinese helps :-)
http://www.enroo.com/uploaddir/Microchip/Secure%20Data/Chinese%20Translated%20Documents/HA2099.pdf
3 timers
PWM
2kx14, 128x8, ...
Supplier contact details at end (Shen Zhen)
Russell McMahon
_PIC _lowcost _Holtek _uP
MCV08A MCV14A MCV18A MCV28A *HA series:* HA2089 HA2099 HA3089 HA3099
Funny NYPD
Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com
http://www.AuElectronics.com/products
http://augroups.blogspot.com/
________________________________
From: Russell McMahon <appt...@gmail.com>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <pic...@mit.edu>
Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2009 8:40:34 AM
Subject: Re: [PIC] New small Micro family from Microchip?
Tamas Rudnai
http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/41300A.pdf
Tamas
Funny NYPD
See the news (2007) at Microchip web at this link:
http://www.microchip.com/stellent/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=2018&mcparam=en531033
Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com
http://www.AuElectronics.com/products
http://augroups.blogspot.com/
________________________________
From: Tamas Rudnai <tamas....@gmail.com>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <pic...@mit.edu>
Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2009 12:30:07 PM
Terry Harris
>If you compare MCV14A with PIC16F526, you may find them
>almost exactly the same (less packaging option)
>http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/41326B.pdf
When you compare the characteristic specifications the MCV14A has a few
that are looser and has no FLASH endurance specification.
IMO they are functional reject PICs or 'toy' parts. Is the term 'toy' still
used?
I don't really see customer testing the parts, Microchip already tested
them to reject them (unless maybe they reject whole wafers but would they
package any untested die?).
Jan-Erik Soderholm
> Is the term 'toy' still used?
Last time I heard it was when the VAX hardware from DEC had a
toy clock (Time Of Year), but that might been something else... :-)
Jan-Erik.
Tamas Rudnai
> what "HA" means? I remember seeing somewhere the white appliance
> manufacturer: Haier, was making PIC compatible chips. Is "HA" means the chip
> is designed and made by Haier or other third parties, and sold from
> Microchip?
>
> See the news (2007) at Microchip web at this link:
>
> http://www.microchip.com/stellent/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=2018&mcparam=en531033
Yes, I remember there was a patent issue recently. Here we go, this was the
message from Xiaofan about that:
fromXiaofan Chen <xiao...@gmail.com>reply-to"Microcontroller discussion
list - Public." <pic...@mit.edu>
to"Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <pic...@mit.edu>
dateSat, Oct 25, 2008 at 3:11 PMsubject[OT] Microchip patent invalidated in
Chinamailing listpiclist.mit.edu Filter messages from this mailing list
mailed-bymit.edu
hide details 10/25/08
Reply
[image: Follow up message]
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/1964286/
"China's Patent Reexamination Board of the State Intellectual Property
Office (SIPO) made an invalidation ruling on micro-controller instruction
set patent with the number 00800648.2 of Microchip Technology Inc."
"A semiconductor expert points out that the patent ruled as invalid is
currently
used for Microchip's medium- and high-end product line, and involves
hundreds
of models of products. The ruling is likely to threaten the company's
product
and market strategy in the Chinese market. Currently, the Asian market,
led by China, contributes to 43% of its gross operating revenues."
Take note Haier Group is a very big company. It once wanted to
acquire Maytag but failed. Shanghai Haier is its semiconductor venture.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haier
Xiaofan
--
Spehro Pefhany
>On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 20:03:02 +0800, Xiaofan wrote:
>
> >If you compare MCV14A with PIC16F526, you may find them
> >almost exactly the same (less packaging option)
> >http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/41326B.pdf
>
>When you compare the characteristic specifications the MCV14A has a few
>that are looser and has no FLASH endurance specification.
>
>IMO they are functional reject PICs or 'toy' parts. Is the term 'toy' still
>used?
>
>I don't really see customer testing the parts, Microchip already tested
>them to reject them (unless maybe they reject whole wafers but would they
>package any untested die?).
The customer will test a complete module or complete product with the part
installed, meaning if the micro fails at, say, temperatures above 63°C
at maximum clock speed, so might the product (or perhaps not because the
designer has chosen a more conservative clock speed).
I doubt that these are 'rejects', merely not tested as thoroughly or to
as high standards (for use in consumer gadgets, toys and other disposable
stuff where a 1% overall failure rate is not fatal).
>Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Terry Harris
>At 02:13 PM 09/07/2009, you wrote:
>>On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 20:03:02 +0800, Xiaofan wrote:
>>
>> >If you compare MCV14A with PIC16F526, you may find them
>> >almost exactly the same (less packaging option)
>> >http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/41326B.pdf
>>
>>When you compare the characteristic specifications the MCV14A has a few
>>that are looser and has no FLASH endurance specification.
>>
>>IMO they are functional reject PICs or 'toy' parts. Is the term 'toy' still
>>used?
>>
>>I don't really see customer testing the parts, Microchip already tested
>>them to reject them (unless maybe they reject whole wafers but would they
>>package any untested die?).
>
>The customer will test a complete module or complete product with the part
>installed, meaning if the micro fails at, say, temperatures above 63°C
>at maximum clock speed, so might the product (or perhaps not because the
>designer has chosen a more conservative clock speed).
Yes they will (probably) test the whole product but would it make financial
sense to scrap or rework the whole product for processor failures which
were not detected because they didn't pay Microchip enough to test them? I
don't buy that.
>I doubt that these are 'rejects', merely not tested as thoroughly or to
>as high standards (for use in consumer gadgets, toys and other disposable
>stuff where a 1% overall failure rate is not fatal).
They test the chip, if the measured parameters are good enough it gets
PIC16F526E stamped on it. If they are not so good it gets PIC16F526I
stamped on it. If it is worse again it gets MCV14A stamped on it.
A PIC16F526I is a reject PIC16F526E and an MCV14A a reject PIC16F526I. If
they make mostly very good chips they can stamp whatever number customers
want to buy on them (as long as the cheapest ones still show a profit).
I used to work for TI (long time ago). Transistors got graded into voltage
and/or Hfe ranges and were marked with the appropriate part number.
Transistors that didn't meet the lowest specification but still worked a
bit got some strange number stamped on them and were sold by the bucket to
Hong Kong or somewhere to make toys from hence the 'toy part' description.
The point I am making is they were all tested and sold cheap because they
were junk not because they left the testing up to the buyer.
Xiaofan Chen
> what "HA" means? I remember seeing somewhere the white appliance
> manufacturer: Haier, was making PIC compatible chips. Is "HA" means
> the chip is designed and made by Haier or other third parties, and sold
> from Microchip?
The HA parts are also from Microchip. They need to be specially
approved by Microchip. They are the low cost parts specifically
for the the home appliance market.
HA = Home Appliance
Reference:
http://www.ourdev.cn/bbs/bbs_content.jsp?bbs_sn=831236&bbs_page_no=6&bbs_id=1028
--
Xiaofan http://mcuee.blogspot.com
Tamas Rudnai
devices?
Tamas