At 23.08 2011.10.23, you wrote: >On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Electron wrote= : >> >> Something that requires good raw computing power. The dsPIC could suffic= e >> but it would draw too much current. I'm evaluating tricky ways to reduce >> current consumption on the dsPIC xor move on / convert to the PIC32. > >Is there a benchmark that has been made with identical algorithms to >compare power consumptions of dsPIC and PIC32 ? I looked at the datasheets, and was impressed by the difference. In my case it's like 20mA vs 130mA, as the PIC32 has more features that can be used to save energy (to say one, you can clock the peripherals at lower frequences than the CPU, but you still have a 1-cycle counter (which I need bad) that follows the CPU clock, and the I/O ports remain too at full speed). The PIC32 is really a couple or three steps forward 24/30/33 chips, althoug= h I loved and still love them a lot. And a dsPIC I used much (the 30F6012) co= sts like 5 times more the most featured PIC32 (e.g. 695 or 795 chips). True, 33= F cost less than 30F, but I haven't used any. I will use the PIC32 a lot if t= he future as I have many projects which need raw computing power. Moreover, it doesn't have a DSP core, but at least it can do 64bitAcc+=3D32bit*32bit ope= rations in 2 cycles (which don't stall the CPU, so you can do something else in the odd cycles). The MIPS is a good platform, although I don't like the asm syntax and it doesn't even look that good vs ARM or other RISC architectures, but then benchmarks seem to be all in favour of MIPS. Also, the Microchip implementa= tion of the MIPS M4K core is all for speed, they seem to have really worked to g= ive a powerful CPU, as all performance options during synthesis were used (mult= iple buses, high performance mul/div, etc..). --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .