Why is PIC better than AVR?

Why is PIC better than AVR?

Oh, Is it really ?

If you don't know why, how can you claim that ?

Even the poorest thing can be the best for a particular application where much bigger and faster devices just don't fit.

Define a common denominator for comparison, and only then ask what is better on that ground.

Regards, yego

P.S. Once upon a time the most popular question on the 11+ exam in USSR schools was:
Who do you admire the most, and why it is comrade Lenin ?

i think that the PIC microcontroller's stuff easily available and it is older one

but the AVR is newer that is why very few peoples worked on it

RollingEEE said:

Why is PIC better than AVR?

Click to expand...

I am a PIC fan. But this is an inappropriate question. Who can tell which one is better! (Please don't start another flame on this subject!).

Cheers,

If you don't know why, how can you claim that ?

Click to expand...

Actually I don't know anything about PIC. Some one wrote that PIC is better in reply to one of my posts and that is why I asked, if that is really true. (Like Pentium Core Duo is better than Pentium III)

Thanks yego, cool joke, but I'm sorry to say that you completely misunderstood my point.

RollingEEE said:

but I'm sorry to say that you completely misunderstood my point.

Click to expand...

Your question was written the way it was, so it assumed that PIC is better in the first place. The question then was not if but why it is better than AVR.
So if you like not to be misunderstood, ask the question you really want to ask, and don't count that someone will read your intention instead of the written text.

Some people form their statements disregarding many circumstances which sometimes may influence the answer.
IMHO this is just the case with the opinion you heard about PIC and AVR comparison.

Try asking your question as follows: Is PIC better than AVR?
I am sure you'll get twice as many opinions as persons answering your question
This will certainly make it hard to extract your own opinion on the subject

Regards, yego

AVR is better than PIC in instruction set (higher speed and C code optimized),AVR is also very good in hardware and its peripherals.

There are very wide range of AVRs ,there are very good compilers for it like as IAR,free GCC for AVR(winavr).

Hi all, the if any one ask for are there different or no? i can say that there is a different.
In the view of the speed the AVR is about 4 times than the PIC.
why? the crystal freq. for example in the PIC will be divided by 4 to have the real speed that the PIC controller work with, but for AVR the frequency of 4Mhz means in real 4 million instruction per second

Added after 2 minutes:

There also another differences, in my view the AVR controller is some how better than PIC.
I will upload another time a document created by ATMEL company includes some of these diffrences

i think the appropriate question is why avr faster than pic or why avr micro range is better than pic?

see this benchmark :
**broken link removed**

This is a PIC vs AVR difference pdf file which i told u before

AVR VERSUS PIC

• Pic memory and registers are divided into pages. This means that
you not only write to an address, but you have to make sure that
you've got the right page selected. Since there's no practical way to
tell what page is currently selected, your only option is to explicitly
select the page before you do anything.

• Interrupt routines in particular, need to select the page, then put it
back when you exit. This makes ISR's take even longer.

• Registers: In the AVR, you can do pretty much anything, anywhere.
There are a couple of restrictions on the lower registers. In the pic, you have to move data into the "W" register before you can do anything with it, then put it back where you got it. Slow.
• Interrupts: Vectored ints on the AVR, on the Pic F84 the ints are
not vectored, so after you save a register or two to work in, you
have to go scan through the possible int sources to see where the
int came from, then dispatch to a handler.. Slow.

• Security: PIC types can be cracked. Once you lock a Pic, it's forever.
AVR: Very secure. You can erase the entire device (including
the lock bit) electrically, and re-program it later. You can't read the
code out, but you can reprogram the device and use it again.

• Speed: PIC divdes the clock by 4 but AVR does not divide the
clock. (AVR@16MHz = PIC@64MHz)

• ATMEL is very proud of the throughput of the AVR.The company
gives the following sample C code, which it compiled and ran on
several different processors:
SPEED SPEED SPEED ...
int max(int *array)
{
char a;
int maximum =-32768;
for (a =0;a <16;a++)
if (array [a] > maximum)
maximum =array [a ];
return (maximum);
}

Their results are interesting


• This indicates that,when running at the same clock speed, an AVRis 7 times faster than a
PIC16, 15 times faster than a 68HC11, and a whopping 28 times faster than an 8051.

• Alternatively ,you’d have to have an 8051 running at 224MHz to match the speed of an
8MHz AVR.

• Now, ATMEL doesn’t give specifics of which compiler(s) it used for the tests, and results can certainly be tweaked one way or the other with appropriately chosen source code.

• However, my personal experience is that, with the AVR, you certainly do get significantly denser code and much faster execution.

Re: Why is PIC better than AVR? Power consumption?

Hello all.
I would like to ask if anyone of you has some experience and can help concerning power consumption.

Which microcontroller can give the best compromise power consumption versus performance?

I am interested in getting the best performance/speed in a low power consumption application.

Thanks
S.

Sorry. Iam a PIC fan.

But I am also not blind. Usualy avr is faster, it uses actually isntruccion per clock.

AVR has very good peripherals as well.

But one of the things I like the most from microchip is that is has some many applications notes that there is a very good chance that whatever you are going to do, they haveit already published by someone.

Not to metion the many interestings things you learn just looking at their ideas for design.

I thing it a good point when it comes for the learning curve and the time to market in your work

PIC is easily available and easy to implemented controller. It is also well known every where.

avr is better than pic. Free development tools, compilers, good knowledge base. Advanced architecture.

In my country pic is much accessible than avr. Thats why i could not test the differences. If avr was so available, may be I would prefer it.

thanks

Wat abt ARM?
Can be compared on the same level?

atmaca
In my country AVRs accessible in many places in single quantities and cheaper than any PICs (Mega8 rules)

PICs can have somewhat dencer code but executes 4 clocks/cycle, can do operations directly on memory resident operands, AVR must first load from memory to registers, do operation, then store it back, but if operands already in registers, processing is faster than on PICs

In every AVR vs PIC comparision I found PIC16 MCU's.
It's a little cheating, because PIC18 MCU's are much better, than PIC16. And nobody has mention PIC24, dsPIC etc.
Comparing an ATMEGA with a ~20years old PIC16C74 is a joke