At 12:40 PM 6/15/2010, alan smith wrote:
>Can anyone that has both an ICD3 and a ICE..comment on how well the 
>ICD3 works as an ICE? I thought I had read someplace that it was 
>intended on replacing it.  Advantage of an ICE over the ICD3 for debugging?

We have a couple of MPLAB ICE2000 units, several ICD2s and a couple 
of ICD3s.  Although I don't use the ICD3 yet, my buddy does and 
really likes it compared to the ICD2.  However, I will confine my 
comments to comparisons between the ICE2000 and ICD2.

Major differences:

1) Cost.  The ICD2/3 costs WAY less than an ICE2000.

2) On-going cost: the little header boards that you need when 
debugging a low-pin-count PIC cost WAY less than a comparable 
processor module for the ICE2000.  Larger PICs don't need that little 
header board, so even that low cost is eliminated.

The ICE2000 requires an expensive processor module for every 
different PIC that you use it with.


3) Speed: the ICE2000 is WAY faster to use when debugging.  You don't 
have to wait for the processor or header board to be re-programmed 
everytime you do something.

4) Breakpoints: the ICE2000 supports an unlimited number of 
breakpoints.  The ICD2/3 supports only one breakpoint, at least with 
the PICs that I use.  I'm told that some newer PICs will allow up to 
two breakpoints.

5) Complex breakpoints: the ICD2/3 can't do these.  You do need the 
ICE2000 if you are trying to set up complex conditions that will 
cause a break or start a trace.

6) Trace memory: the ICD2/3 can't to this.  You need the ICE2000.


My take on the subject: I use the ICD2/3 while I'm evaluating a PIC 
that I can't shoehorn into one of the ICE2000 processor modules that 
I already have.  Once I've made the decision to do significant work 
with that new PIC, I purchase one or two processor modules for it.  I 
try to ensure that the project's development cost to the customer 
reflects at least a portion of the cost of purchasing those processor modules.

Part of the charm of the ICE2000 is that it REALLY speeds up the 
edit/compile/run/crash loop that I often do when I'm closing in on a 
bug.  You can evaluate minor code changes in just a few (3-5) seconds.

I do use the ICD2 when I'm troubleshooting in the field.  Its 
entirely adequate and does everything that I need to do while 
troubleshooting - its just not as quick as the ICE2000.

dwayne

-- 
Dwayne Reid   <dwayner@planet.eon.net>
Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd    Edmonton, AB, CANADA
(780) 489-3199 voice          (780) 487-6397 fax
www.trinity-electronics.com
Custom Electronics Design and Manufacturing

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist