Microchip's PIC microcontrollers

  • Thread starter Thread starter orthovector
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around recommendations for microcontrollers suitable for amateur robotics engineers, with a focus on various brands and models, including Microchip's PIC, Atmel's AVR, and others. Participants share their experiences and preferences regarding different microcontroller families and their features.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express a preference for Microchip's PIC microcontrollers, citing their ease of use for beginners.
  • Others recommend Atmel's AVR microcontrollers, highlighting their RISC architecture and cost-effectiveness, along with the availability of free development tools.
  • One participant mentions the Motorola 68000 and its variants, praising their advanced features like the Time Processing Unit (TPU) but acknowledges their higher cost and older technology.
  • Another participant disagrees with the praise for the HC11, describing it as outdated and suggesting that PICs and ARM series chips are more suitable for modern applications.
  • Parallax is mentioned as a viable option for affordable microcontrollers, particularly for beginners, with good technical support.
  • A participant notes the advantages of Silabs microcontrollers for high-precision mixed signal applications, emphasizing their compatibility with existing 8051 code.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the suitability and performance of various microcontroller families, indicating that multiple competing views remain without a clear consensus on the best option for amateur robotics.

Contextual Notes

Some participants emphasize the importance of specific features like PWM channels and development tools, while others focus on cost and ease of use. The discussion reflects a range of experiences and preferences, with no single microcontroller being universally accepted as the best choice.

orthovector
Messages
115
Reaction score
0
I like Microchip's PIC microcontrollers. The ATMEL microcontrollers are a bit more advanced, but I am gradually going towards them. Are there other companies you would recommend for amateur robotics engineers?

thanks.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org


The venerable Motorola 68000, one of its variants (HC11 is very popular in certain circles), or its most recent descendent, the Motorola DragonBall. Beefier and more expensive than all but the high end of either PIC or ATMEL.

However, the Time Processing Unit (TPU) on the microcontroller variants is miles beyond anything you find on a PIC or ATMEL. 16 nearly-independent channels of PWM, input capture, clock generation, phase shifting, etc.

Also, since they're so old, most of the bugs and quirks are well documented and ironed out.

But outside of that, the Z80 sees strong enthusiast support, though I'm not sure about its updated descendants made by Rabbit Semiconductor.
 


For amateur robotics, Parallax makes some very reasonably-priced stuff, including their BASIC-Stamp series of microcontrollers. I have used them in the past, they are easy to work with and have good technical support.

www.parallax.com
 


MATLABdude said:
The venerable Motorola 68000, one of its variants (HC11 is very popular in certain circles), or its most recent descendent, the Motorola DragonBall. Beefier and more expensive than all but the high end of either PIC or ATMEL.

I have to disagree. I've used the HC11s/HC12s before and IMO they are archaic pieces of crap. The only reason they are still around is because old timers are to lazy to learn anything new.

PICs are a very good place to start. You don't need to know PICs and AVRs, they both have products that will do the job of what ever it is your going to do unless you get into the 32-bit stuff. If that's the case I like the ARM series chips. If you get into the really advanced stuff the GumStixx are pretty nice as they can run linux.

Parallax makes some great boards and chips but I think they are a level below PICs. I still have and use my trusty Basic Stamp II board for all sorts of small projects.

I've sort of been out of the electronics circle for a while but I'm still using an ARM7 for my research project.
 


Hi:

I'm new to the forum. I've just registered. I work with microcontrollers. I can strongly recommend Atmel AVR microcontrollers as they are real RISC. Atmel has a "motor control oriented" AVR's with lotsa pwm channels and it's Xmega series, 8 bitters also that are IO general control oriented. And are cheaper than PICS. Also the code is portable between micro families (that's why I preferred AVR's over PIC. Pic's change their instruction width between family)
You have C compilers available for free (GNU GCC), and their most useful piece of software is AVR studio, which is used for development and debug and it's free. You have available RTOS firmware for free, for operating system coding, in case you're not going to program the bare metal.

And finally, there are the AVR32 architecture, RISC, well supported (GCC, Linux, FreeRTOS, AVR32 Studio), and ultra high throughput multimedia oriented (AP7 series) or high speed Control /connectivity oriented (UC3X series)

The debug probes are the same for all the AVR microcontrolers (AVR and AVR32) and are cheap. And the microcontrollers indeed are cheap (compared with others with the same capabilities) Even the 32 bitters are head to head in price with the most powerful 8 bitters (to date).

For high precission mixed signal oriented microcontrollers you can check the Silabs microcontrollers. They are 8051 RISC tuned supersets, so most of the existing 8051 code can run on it faster. Their analog performance is very good, as a friend of mine told.


check
www.atmel.com
www.avrfreaks.net
www.silabs.com
winavr.sourceforge.net/index.html
www.freertos.org

Cheers
Nachus
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K