I've now got the resources to learn one. I'd only really be using it for audio purposes like amp controls.
Which one is better/more flexable for audio puproses?
Which one is better/more flexable for audio puproses?
From my "research" and what I hear from friends in the know, AVR is easier and more flexible + you can stop the clock on the AVR meaning that it is not resonating when "idle".
You will likely get varied opinions on this one, and the best way to go for you might be a function of your existing profile -- in software AND how you plan to utilize the equipment (how do you build circuits etc.).
You mention amp control -- perhaps you want some ADC sections to monitor voltages. This might also influence the choice of family.
I am of course assuming that you are going to be doing housekeeping work and not digital audio stream processing where you might want to look at a DSP or even a PC.
Petter
You will likely get varied opinions on this one, and the best way to go for you might be a function of your existing profile -- in software AND how you plan to utilize the equipment (how do you build circuits etc.).
You mention amp control -- perhaps you want some ADC sections to monitor voltages. This might also influence the choice of family.
I am of course assuming that you are going to be doing housekeeping work and not digital audio stream processing where you might want to look at a DSP or even a PC.
Petter
Agree with that. But digital noise is not an issue if it is done properly. Stopping the clock and let the MCU go into sleep is easy with the AVR’s indeed. It will be awakened on an interrupt (e.g. a key press).Petter said:
PIC’s as well as the AVR’s are both suitable for housekeeping tasks. I personally stick with the AVR’s. I’ve found them indeed more flexible and easier to program in assembler. They range from “Tiny” to “Mega”. Development tools cost almost nothing. A simple connection to the printer port will program them “in circuit”. But this is the same for most PIC’s.
My advice: Dig through bot architectures and the op-code list. Choose the one you feel most comfortable with.
Cheers.
pro pic:
- free samples
- very cheap diy programmers
- lots of examples in the internet how to use them, turorials, and:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12186
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10817&highlight=PGA2310
http://www.mhennessy.f9.co.uk/
what means some people on this board descided for PIC, (i play with them for some weeks now) and you are welcome to join and help us. If you are interested you may mail me.
- free samples
- very cheap diy programmers
- lots of examples in the internet how to use them, turorials, and:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12186
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10817&highlight=PGA2310
http://www.mhennessy.f9.co.uk/
what means some people on this board descided for PIC, (i play with them for some weeks now) and you are welcome to join and help us. If you are interested you may mail me.
Architecture & instruction set are only important if you're doing something high performance (although you may want to check the powerdown features). For hobbyist stuff, what is more important is where you can buy evaluation boards; price of assembler / compiler etc.; the price; the features; and probably most important: the user groups.
From what I've heard, either is a good choice. AVR has a good user group, I'm sure the PIC has one too.
No need to buy an evaluation board:
This is my cheapo ev. board for 16F876:
7805
cristal up to 20 Mhz or resonator
pot for testing the ADC on portA
alps rotary encoder (0,45€)
LCD (7€, 2*16C), most expensive part
ICSP
in future i will add a max232 (they sent me soic, i wait until maxim send me a DIP)
PGA2310 and relais board will be connected as doughterboards.
This is my cheapo ev. board for 16F876:
7805
cristal up to 20 Mhz or resonator
pot for testing the ADC on portA
alps rotary encoder (0,45€)
LCD (7€, 2*16C), most expensive part
ICSP
in future i will add a max232 (they sent me soic, i wait until maxim send me a DIP)
PGA2310 and relais board will be connected as doughterboards.
Attachments
Microchip is rolling out PICkit 1
new intro development kit -- runs off the USB port, etc. -- only $39 -- should be available this week.
When it comes to programming, I use PicBasic Pro -- but I test the code out on a Basic Stamp II before committing to solder -- it's a breeze programming with PBP and you don't have to take the chip out and reprogram it if you have an error.
new intro development kit -- runs off the USB port, etc. -- only $39 -- should be available this week.
When it comes to programming, I use PicBasic Pro -- but I test the code out on a Basic Stamp II before committing to solder -- it's a breeze programming with PBP and you don't have to take the chip out and reprogram it if you have an error.
AVR pros:
Flash meory, easy to program with a cheap programming device in-circuit-programming, very neat.
Modern cpu core
Fast
cons: Not so good documentation, could be better
PIC pros: Easy to learn, good documention
cons: Memory management
Both: works very good in industrial enviroment but AVR needs a reset chip otherwise the EE-memory can be corrupted.
Go for AVR! Cheap starter kit STK-500! 40-50 USD only.
Flash meory, easy to program with a cheap programming device in-circuit-programming, very neat.
Modern cpu core
Fast
cons: Not so good documentation, could be better
PIC pros: Easy to learn, good documention
cons: Memory management
Both: works very good in industrial enviroment but AVR needs a reset chip otherwise the EE-memory can be corrupted.
Go for AVR! Cheap starter kit STK-500! 40-50 USD only.
Dont want to say pro or con here. I am using pic's, since i got some for free one day. Think they can do more or less the same,
comparted to AVR.
Also the pic i am using is able to stop the clock and go into sleepmode (16F84). And eeprom and etc. No experience with AVR..
Just look for info on the net for what you want to do with it.
If you then need some help with something, you can ask people.
You don't need to buy a developmentkit. There are many programmers on the net, just connecting to a pc port. Development software is downloadable at microchip, guess all is the same for AVR.
Have a look at my www to see what can be done with a pic.
There are two more preamps here with pic's.
Greetings,
GuidoB
comparted to AVR.
Also the pic i am using is able to stop the clock and go into sleepmode (16F84). And eeprom and etc. No experience with AVR..
Just look for info on the net for what you want to do with it.
If you then need some help with something, you can ask people.
You don't need to buy a developmentkit. There are many programmers on the net, just connecting to a pc port. Development software is downloadable at microchip, guess all is the same for AVR.
Have a look at my www to see what can be done with a pic.
There are two more preamps here with pic's.
Greetings,
GuidoB
I'll add my comments as well.
I have never used an AVR. Either choice is probably OK.
We are building a project with three different PICs.
All of them have Flash, two need no external oscillator.
The peripherals are easy to use, you can buy an inexpensive "C" compiler (CCS). Development is easy with a low cost ICD2 adapter. There is lots of available code on the net.
Documentation could be better.
Examples of Microchip projects
Dale
I have never used an AVR. Either choice is probably OK.
We are building a project with three different PICs.
All of them have Flash, two need no external oscillator.
The peripherals are easy to use, you can buy an inexpensive "C" compiler (CCS). Development is easy with a low cost ICD2 adapter. There is lots of available code on the net.
Documentation could be better.
Examples of Microchip projects
Dale
I find the memory model of the AVR is easier to deal with. You can get the AVR dev kit with one micro included from Digi-Key for a pittance.
Also, the AVR tools for Linux are quite complete. AVR is supported in gcc, binutils, etc.
Also, the AVR tools for Linux are quite complete. AVR is supported in gcc, binutils, etc.
I am using avr for my preamp. It is my second project using micro's, both avr's. For my first project I was programming in assembly. My preamp's micro is completely done in C, using avr-gcc. I find it easier then programming in assembly. I interface with an lcd using avr-lib libraries, which makes live easy (using printf to print to an lcd without the worries of how to interface with an lcd).
I have also tried to use readily available rc5 routines, my luck on them was not so good, so I have implemented an rc5 decoding routine myself. The mcu is normally in sleep mode and is wakened using the interupts for both the keypress and the ir-stuff.
I was amazed how easy it was to use an avr without to much experience.
Some urls i found usefull for my avr projects:
www.avrfreaks.com
http://savannah.nongnu.org/download/avr-libc/doc/avr-libc-user-manual/
http://hubbard.engr.scu.edu/avr/avrlib/
http://www.lancos.com/prog.html
http://www.mysunrise.ch/users/pfleury/
I have also tried to use readily available rc5 routines, my luck on them was not so good, so I have implemented an rc5 decoding routine myself. The mcu is normally in sleep mode and is wakened using the interupts for both the keypress and the ir-stuff.
I was amazed how easy it was to use an avr without to much experience.
Some urls i found usefull for my avr projects:
www.avrfreaks.com
http://savannah.nongnu.org/download/avr-libc/doc/avr-libc-user-manual/
http://hubbard.engr.scu.edu/avr/avrlib/
http://www.lancos.com/prog.html
http://www.mysunrise.ch/users/pfleury/
If you plan to make small programs, a couple of hundreds instructions, PIC and AVR are equal but when the programs are getting larger, AVR is the best. The PIC memory management really sucks. AVR is four times faster, no harm in that. Very easy in-circuit-programming no harm in that either.
I can get both wholesale along with alot of book on them both.
AVR's are looking a better option than a pic.
The main reason I ask is I just landed a job at an electronics company and alot of upcoming projects need microprocessor controls and I make car amps and they definately need some sort of inteligent controls when i'm looking at kilowatts.
Thanks all for your input
AVR's are looking a better option than a pic.
The main reason I ask is I just landed a job at an electronics company and alot of upcoming projects need microprocessor controls and I make car amps and they definately need some sort of inteligent controls when i'm looking at kilowatts.
Thanks all for your input
Some thoughts:
1) The AVR is not 4 times faster than PIC. The 18F series of PICs are 10Mips.
2) If you are concerned about the PIC memory model, stick to the 18F series of PICs. They make it much easier.
3) There are many many more PIC variants on the market and in terms of market share, AVR is still pretty small and I would not say growing tremendously
4) You can turn the oscillator off on the PIC. If you wanted to do something battery powered, the PIC has lowered powered variants.
5) The programming model on the AVR is better.
6) Stick to C, the issues of programming models pretty much goes away.
7) Neither PIC nor AVR are well known for their low noise performance. National COP is best for that, but you don't see them very much any more. NEC would be next best bet, and some Motorola variants also.
8) Speaking of other variants, there are a few other to consider. Motorola 908 family is pretty good. The Code-Warrior development tools are miles ahead of anything from Microchip or Atmel, but anything beyond 4/8K for C will cost you. Assembler is free. You can built a programmer for next to nothing. Cypress PSOC. A very interesting microcontroller that has programmable AMPs, and digital and switched CAP blocks so that you can build up features that you want. A real emulator is dirt cheap and the C-Compiler is cheap as well. TI MSP430. Cheap, reasonably fast, and very low power.
When it comes down to it, just about anything is going to work, but a good wealth of application notes goes a long way and Microchip and Motorola probably lead.
1) The AVR is not 4 times faster than PIC. The 18F series of PICs are 10Mips.
2) If you are concerned about the PIC memory model, stick to the 18F series of PICs. They make it much easier.
3) There are many many more PIC variants on the market and in terms of market share, AVR is still pretty small and I would not say growing tremendously
4) You can turn the oscillator off on the PIC. If you wanted to do something battery powered, the PIC has lowered powered variants.
5) The programming model on the AVR is better.
6) Stick to C, the issues of programming models pretty much goes away.
7) Neither PIC nor AVR are well known for their low noise performance. National COP is best for that, but you don't see them very much any more. NEC would be next best bet, and some Motorola variants also.
8) Speaking of other variants, there are a few other to consider. Motorola 908 family is pretty good. The Code-Warrior development tools are miles ahead of anything from Microchip or Atmel, but anything beyond 4/8K for C will cost you. Assembler is free. You can built a programmer for next to nothing. Cypress PSOC. A very interesting microcontroller that has programmable AMPs, and digital and switched CAP blocks so that you can build up features that you want. A real emulator is dirt cheap and the C-Compiler is cheap as well. TI MSP430. Cheap, reasonably fast, and very low power.
When it comes down to it, just about anything is going to work, but a good wealth of application notes goes a long way and Microchip and Motorola probably lead.
I ment with 1 MHz clock speed = 1 MIPS AVRalvaius said:
4 MHz = 1 MIPS PIC
Atmel is also huge and the AVR market is groving but it was slow at the start mostly because they hadn't got any cool products. Now, I think the ATtiny and the ATmega is quite OK.
I think it's more irrittating with many models, better to have a few good models. Much easier in production.
PIC and AVR passes CE approval rather easy. Noise isn't a big problem, for industrial applications.
Interesting PIC link
one of the PIC people pointed out the following link this morning.
http://www.mikroelektronika.co.yu/english/product/books/picbasicbook/00.htm
one of the PIC people pointed out the following link this morning.
http://www.mikroelektronika.co.yu/english/product/books/picbasicbook/00.htm
ATMEL is 4 times faster than PIC......
Yes, the ATMEL runs a single clock single instruction format, where the PIC needs 4 clocks. However, the PIC clock frequencies are often much higher. Some AVRs will do 16 MIPS, a few 12 and many lower. PICS top out at 10MIPS, but in terms of comparable devices, they are generally similar in terms of top-mips.
You can make virtually any micro pass CE if you are a good designer. That all said and done, neither PIC nor ATMEL are considered low noise microcontrollers. There are others on the market with better slew control on the I/O, better clocking schemes, etc. that lead to lower system noise.
ATMEL is a big company, but their 8 bit controller share compared to Microchip is still small.
Yes, the ATMEL runs a single clock single instruction format, where the PIC needs 4 clocks. However, the PIC clock frequencies are often much higher. Some AVRs will do 16 MIPS, a few 12 and many lower. PICS top out at 10MIPS, but in terms of comparable devices, they are generally similar in terms of top-mips.
You can make virtually any micro pass CE if you are a good designer. That all said and done, neither PIC nor ATMEL are considered low noise microcontrollers. There are others on the market with better slew control on the I/O, better clocking schemes, etc. that lead to lower system noise.
ATMEL is a big company, but their 8 bit controller share compared to Microchip is still small.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.