Lpc2000

Thanks Bob,

I assume you had the MAM fully enable and MAMTIM set to 0x3 for your 
60MHz tests?

Ken

--- In lpc2100@yahoogroups.com, "lpc2100_fan" <lpc2100_fan@y...> 
wrote:
> Hi Ken,
> 
> we did some measurements of code ranging from mostly linear 
execution
> (best case) to pretty much jump tables with very little linear code
> (worst case). If the code is mostly linear (let's assume one branch
> every 20 instructions or less), execution from RAM and execution 
from
> Flash were virtually identical, 99+% performance from Flash. In
> particular loops that are not nested do not cause wait states. This
> might not be realistic for larger programs but it could be close to 
a
> small DSP control loop.
> 
> Code with lots of branches and no loops was slower by approx. 10-15%
> running from Flash compared to running from RAM. Unfortunately I can
> not provide the programs used, they are part of a benchmark suite 
that
> needs a license. This second program is designed to show performance
> without cache (it is called cache-buster ;-). IMHO it is not very
> close to realistic code and generates performance numbers worse than
> average code. 
> 
> Realisticly, we see operation from Flash (@ 60 MHz) approx. 95% of 
the
> performance compared to running from RAM. This looks extremely good 
to
> us and the claimed "0-waitstate execution"  can pretty much be
> confirmed. It is much closer to 0 waitstates than to 1 waitstates,
> let's call it a rounding error.
> 
> Cheers, Bob
> 
> --- In lpc2100@yahoogroups.com, "kendwyer" <kendwyer@y...> wrote:
> > --- In lpc2100@yahoogroups.com, "Leon Heller" <leon_heller@h...> 
> > wrote:
> > > > Hi all 
> > > >  
> > > > Dose any one know how many MIPS can the lpc2106 do @ 60Mhz ?
> > > 
> > > Philips claims 54 Dhrystone MIPS at 60 MHz:
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
http://www.semiconductors.philips.com/acrobat/literature/9397/75011962
> > .pdf
> > > 
> > > Leon
> > 
> > This is an ideal theoretical number using Dhrystone. Has any one 
done 
> > some real world benchmarking? How effective is the flash "cache" 
with 
> > real code?