| ??? 04/30/07 08:27 Read: times Msg Score: +1 +1 Good Answer/Helpful |
#138265 - No perceivable difference Responding to: ???'s previous message |
I use both 8051 based micros(80C320) and AVR micros (mega128s) in hostile industrial apps. The reliability of a given circuit comes down to the pcb and circuit design. As such, I have no known reliability problems even in extended temperature applications.
My boards are more likely to die from environmental effects like being submerged in seawater or direct hits from lightning rather than chip failure. As for whether the AVR is 'better' than 8051 - depends on what style of 8051 we're talking about. Compared to an old 12clocker 8051, yes, the AVR is substantially faster and has on chip eeprom. Compare an AVR to a latter day 8051 single clocker, then the performance advantage has disappeared. As for code density, depending on the exact application etc, the 8051 is usually smaller by up to 30%. Most of my apps are done in 'c', so the choice of compiler affects the exact numbers. Most of my apps could be done in a myriad of different micros with no outward difference. The reason I use 8051 and AVRs is that I have the tools and the experience. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| MCU Core performance stability atmels | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Unanswerable! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No perceivable difference | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| stability ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| perhaps he means..... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I thought that was PCs? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| EMI environments | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| please elaborate | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Microchip documents them -no | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| is nothing but sales babble | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| PIC Perception | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| broad sales driven statement | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| what 'issues'? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Atmegas | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Looking Inside? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| you don't? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| able to keep up | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
and so is NXP | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Atmegas | 01/01/70 00:00 |