[sdiy] Small MCU MIPS, DMIPS?

[Gordon JC Pearce]

On Tue, 2011-03-01 at 16:29 +0000, karl dalen wrote:

> > can with what is actually available.  We hobbyists
> > have always had to deal with
> > parts that sell the best in things unrelated to what we
> > want to do.  That  hasn't changed since the early days
> >and won't in the future  I'm afraid.
> 
> It has changed over and over again, we go from one simple
> solution (Z80) to more and more complex, you have just
> missed it. The answer are the FPGA that you hold in your hand. 

At one time the Z80 was a very expensive and complex part.  Not that
long ago, either.

> Do i really need a DSPIC for a microwave when it can be
> done with a 555?

Why would you use an expensive, power-hungry and complex 555 with all
its many fiddly external components to generate a more-or-less random
cooking time, when you could use a cheap simple microcontroller with no
external parts instead?

Obviously you'll need some sort of relay driver for both to switch the
magnetron ;-)

> > Possibly, but it was bound to happen.  And with FPGA
> > technology, I can put an 8 or 16 voice poly synth into
> > a single chip which implements high quality DSP. 
> > Such a chip is less than $20.  Try making a 16 voice
> > polysynth with similar features using CEM for $20.
> 
> Im not against functionality, im oposed to complexity
> when it should had been simplified. What if you had to 
> chose between current FPGA and same in DIP16? You 
> obviously take the DIP16.

I can't see a good reason to choose DIP16 over TQFP.  Why would I waste
time with fiddly awkward through-hole parts?

> For every 50 extra balls you add another layer of PCB
> complexity. And the cost grows seriously.Its like MIPS,
> more balls dont cut if they are just small. :) 

You get TQFP FPGAs.  They're not the biggest or the fastest, but they're
perfectly adequate and easily hand-solderable.

Gordon MM0YEQ