Pic or 8051 , which is perfect for me?

[samcheetah]

IanP has given a really nice suggestion

you are right that using an FPGA gives you alot of flexibility. but you cant make a microcontroller core in verilog by yourself in one day. microcontroller cores are available as IP cores from different companies and you also have to buy the cores from them. okay, yes there are also free IP cores but not everything is free.

if you feel comfortable with verilog then its okay to design your projects using an FPGA. but when dealing with FPGAs think big! an LED flasher no matter how complex and pretty looking it is, wont look good as an FPGA based project. try going for something like embedded ethernet or cdma etc.

the thing is that microcontrollers serve a different group of people and FPGAs target another sector of the market. nowadays you have many choices; microcontrollers, PSoC, CPLD, FPGA, DSP etc. choose wisely :|

 

[sp]

thank you sam**** again... i am just looking for info...

hope i am not diverging the topic by the original poster... i am sorry for any inconvenient...

Brother, toss a coin ..
Regards,
IanP

toss a coin... hahahha... it is too bad to do tht...

warm regards,
sp

 

[Unomano]

stop choosing and take 8051+Keil

 

[Milan]

stop choosing and take 8051+ke*il

Thanks for Your oppinion but a lot of people can not pay 3000 euros (few 100`s more or less) for Keil alltough it is a great tool.

Why not use MSP430 and some cheap or free c compilers for it. (16 bit ...A/D ..etc)

Best regards Milan

 

[Yasoo]

I decided I was going to learn how to do this stuff about 2 weeks ago. I've had to decide what chip to program for. I've read a little in these forums, talked to some people who work in the field, and researched the web. My conclusion (based on me being a beginner and having a few ideas of some devices I want to make - take it for what it's worth) is that what's better isn't PIC vs. 8051, but what packaged design system I can get. I've seen some nice ones for that have buttons, leds to all pins, IDC10 connectors for pins, LCD, 7 segs, etc. all on the protoboard, a connection to the computer, software to talk to it, examples for basic things to get you started, etc. Thing is, there seems to be nice ones for both PIC and 8051.

 

[sonizindagi]

y don't u use adc0804 8-bit adc, if u only need a/d convertor.

 

[pvinbox@yahoo.com]

hai

pic is very good to learn and implement

 

[louisnells]

Hey
There are different flavours of Intel 8051. Many companies have licence to build 8051 cores and they are building advanced versions of it for example controllers from Seimens, Philips, Atmel, etc ... . But programming with 8051 is easy to do. And if you know C for writing firmware is even easier.

But using PIC and ARM processor will actually enhance your skills. Because they are RISC. Also they both allow us to build efficient implementations. PIC is particularly useful for small projects or modules. But to implement things like protocol encoders and decoders you have to go for ARM processors. ARM processors are commonly used in MP3 players.

PowerPC is used for even bigger implementations. Think of a small computer with OS in it like palm top or mobile. There are PowerPC flavour embedded processors from Motorola (Free Scale series) and IBM (PPC401, PPC440).

If you are trying to be a skilled designer this should be your line of implementations
8051 -> PIC -> ARM -> PPC

 

[John Dekker]

I recently shifted from 8051 to PIC because of availability, included periferals, support, availability of DIP parts, included osc etc. In many ways I liked the architecture of the 8051 better but feel it is a pity none of the manufacturers did with the 8051 core what Microchip did with the PIC. You won't regret the chage.
Regards,
John.

 

[Root-D]

hai

i wan't to give a little comment,

for some people (including me) choosing a microcontroller is rather hard because there's a limitation on each type you choose (in my case it's the AVR or 8051), you should consider the time to develop the application to build, the cost of researching it and the availability in the market.

for me i changed my studying from 8051 to AVR about 3 years ago and i found that it is interesting, because it changes my perspective from CISC micro to RISC micro, although i found it a little difficult if starting form the assembler level.

my sugesstion is if you already have 8051 base stick with it !, try to search the limitation of the 8051, because the reason i turned to AVR is the speed of processing. PIC is not bad although i only tried it a few times.

regards.

 

[xiaoqun]

I think msp430 is a good choice,if you want to use a 8051 core ,you can choose a AD's microcontroller

 

[dika]

just a subjective opinion...

MSP430 is a good all rounder when the theme is set on low power operation
and it has an in chip ADC DAC...

 

[masud58]

as my site i prefer use pic . all thing u will get. thanks for all.

masud

 

[nguyennam]

Maybe we should toss a coin as IanP said.

Choosing what depending on which people around you have been using and qualified to, depending on document/sample circuits/sample codes available arround you, depending on what you are planning to do.

Yet 8051 is too "old", but it is still there, made by many manufacturers (Atmel, Philips, ...), and has been improving its features for the modern time. It is cheap, lots of document, applications, examples, ... related to it.

PIC is a newer MCU, although has been supplying by only 1 manufacturer (Microchip), but it is available everywhere, with many sizes to choose for fitting your projects, many features of the modern time, many document, software supported, even free, easy to learn even with its assembler (MPLAB).

Although I am still support 8051, but I strongly suggest you to learn and use PIC.

nguyennam

 

[budhy]

i use bascom , proteus ,keil, 8052 simulator, batronix , i want to do more project with atmel.

You use BASCOM 8051 for 8051 project, so you can switch smoothly to AVR with BASCOM AVR.
AVR has very wide range, please take a look at
http://www.atmel.com/dyn/products/param_table.asp?family_id=607&OrderBy=part_no&Direction=ASC
and AVR has a good community at http://www.avrfreaks.net/

 

[srinu249]

PIC is BEST FOr Long time Service

 

[ezpcb]

In my opinion, 8051 can do what PIC can do (PIC 12 and 16). classic 8051 is slow because of it's 12 clock per instruction. But there are many 1T 8051 MCU out there, such as siliconlab (www.silabls.com), atmel (www.atmel.com), STC (www.stc-51.com). 1T 8051 is faster than PIC because it's CISC structure.
If cost must be concerned, nobody can beat STC 8051 uC. More than 1000 parts to choose, price is at least 30-40% less than other competitors with the same configuration.

 

[tempos]

Now, in 2011, neither PIC nor AVR or 8051 has more speed than the other two competitors.

Whatever advantages PIC or AVR might have had, 10-15 years ago, over 8051, they all dissipated with the new Silab C8051Fxxx high speed one clockers. Modern 8051s are competitive and comparable with any modern 8 bit uController.

So, if you are used with old microprogrammed 8051s, it does not make sense to learn PIC or AVR. Just go with Silab C8051Fxxx or similar high speed 8051s made by Atmel or other companies and forget about any other 8 bit general purpose uC.

Both PIC and AVR make a lot of noise and advertise their uCs as being the future, wrongly stating about 8051 that it is just legacy. Unfortunately many people, especially hobbyists, have been fooled by the marketing strategies of PIC and AVR and crowded to learn these two controllers just to realize, finally, PIC and AVR have nothing special.