Cypress PSoC recommendations

[Hammy]

I've been using PIC's but I want to try out some of Cypress PSoC
MICROS.

Could anyone who has experience with these please recommend some of
there micros that have lots of sample codes and are the most widely
used. For example the pic16f628 comparable PSOC and the best 8 lead
device. The ones that give the best bang for the buck.

Also I've ordered the CY3217 MINIPROG. I've downloaded PSoC Designer
5.0 and PSoC Programmer 3.06 is this all I need are there any other
recommendations.

Thanks.

 

[David L. Jones]

I've been using PIC's but I want to try out some of Cypress PSoC
MICROS.

Could anyone who has experience with these please recommend some of
there micros that have lots of sample codes and are the most widely
used. For example the pic16f628 comparable PSOC and the best 8 lead
device. The ones that give the best bang for the buck.

Also I've ordered the CY3217 MINIPROG. I've downloaded PSoC Designer
5.0 and PSoC Programmer 3.06 is this all I need are there any other
recommendations.

Thanks.

As an aside, I just read that Cypress are changing their 8 bit core to 8051
and will also have a 32bit ARM Cortex M3 version:
http://www.electronicsweekly.com/bl...-m3-put-at-the-heart-of-cypress-psoc-pla.html

Dave.

 

[Hammy]

I've been using PIC's but I want to try out some of Cypress PSoC
MICROS.

Could anyone who has experience with these please recommend some of
there micros that have lots of sample codes and are the most widely
used. For example the pic16f628 comparable PSOC and the best 8 lead
device. The ones that give the best bang for the buck.

Also I've ordered the CY3217 MINIPROG. I've downloaded PSoC Designer
5.0 and PSoC Programmer 3.06 is this all I need are there any other
recommendations.

Thanks.

Forgot to add to my OP.

Are there any significant advantages these have over PIC's?

 

[Joerg]

They have reconfigurable switched-capacitor blocks that can make them
useful
for a variety of signal processing tasks. They also have a pretty
glitzy bit of
software to help people program them. If you don't need those, there
are a
variety of PICs, AVRs, and others that might be more suitable.

Also, they've got reconfigurable logic blocks that can be handy for
faster digital stuff. Similar to CPLD. Then a charge pump if run on
lowish supplies, and so on. Best to pour a (huge) cup of coffee and
saunter through the datasheet of a PSoC. It's like a new car, every few
minutes you discover a new button or function that your old one doesn't
have

 

[krw]

As an aside, I just read that Cypress are changing their 8 bit core to 8051
and will also have a 32bit ARM Cortex M3 version:
http://www.electronicsweekly.com/bl...-m3-put-at-the-heart-of-cypress-psoc-pla.html

The PSoC-3 is 8051 based and the PSoC-5 is ARM based.

 

[krw]

Also, they've got reconfigurable logic blocks that can be handy for
faster digital stuff. Similar to CPLD. Then a charge pump if run on
lowish supplies, and so on. Best to pour a (huge) cup of coffee and
saunter through the datasheet of a PSoC. It's like a new car, every few
minutes you discover a new button or function that your old one doesn't
have

The Cypress guys have been bending my ear over the PSoC-3/5 for about
a year now. They released everything this week, but the silicon. :-(
I'd love to use it, but their A/D and D/A suck eggs. ...still might
use it, but see sentence #2.

 

[Joerg]

The PSoC-3 is 8051 based and the PSoC-5 is ARM based.

Not a bad decision. You can find a 8051 programmer in every town and
that uC core has the longevity of a VW Beetle. From all the stuff I
repaired around the house that had a uC in there I have a hard time
remembering one that was not some sort of 8051.

 

[krw]

I've used the PSoC for quite a while now. Nice chip with an attractive
blend of analog, digital and microcontroller. But. PSoC 1/2 do have
some short commings:

Bad specs for A/D.

The PSoC 3/5 is still pretty bad. It seems they didn't think there
was a market for even a decent delta-sigma converter.

Analog outputs are very limited range
Few specified maximum ratings in the datasheet, a lot of typical
numbers

Still lacking.

No way to debug inside the chip (analog signals) and combined with no
spice models in can be difficult to do a complex design
Single source component

That's a given. FPGAs are single source too.

A lot of flash used to swap configurations, which means you need to
hard-code them and thats a pain
??

For the new chip PSoC 3/5, the analog is very much better and the
micro speed is up to standard. This I'm sure will be a kick-ass chip.
Don't think though that they will be any better wrt the datasheets and
simulation models

I think you're right. :-( They're talking about releasing Verilog
tools for the digital parts. I told them I wanted VHDL, which they
blew off. ;-)

 

[Hammy]

Also, they've got reconfigurable logic blocks that can be handy for
faster digital stuff. Similar to CPLD. Then a charge pump if run on
lowish supplies, and so on. Best to pour a (huge) cup of coffee and
saunter through the datasheet of a PSoC. It's like a new car, every few
minutes you discover a new button or function that your old one doesn't
have

Thanks for the input.

I've decided to hold off on the PSOC. I'm going to do some more
research and see what other micros are available that offer features
not on PIC's or enhancements. I also don't want to spend a fortune on
programmers and compilers.

I just bought some DDS IC's AD9834 to play with, should keep me busy
for a while.

 

[Anssi Saari]

I've used the PSoC for quite a while now. Nice chip with an attractive
blend of analog, digital and microcontroller. But. PSoC 1/2 do have
some short commings:

Is there any comparison around to Actel's Fusion FPGAs? They have some
analog support and they provide 8051 and Cortex M1 as CPU cores. Would
be interesting to know if the analog parts are better or worse than
the PSoC...

 

[krw]

Is there any comparison around to Actel's Fusion FPGAs? They have some
analog support and they provide 8051 and Cortex M1 as CPU cores. Would
be interesting to know if the analog parts are better or worse than
the PSoC...

Actel's processors are soft cores. They cost you a bundle of slices
(or whatever Actel calls 'em). An 8051 is ~2500 cells, IIRC. The
Actel part I'm designing in now only has 750. 2500 FPGA cells makes a
damned expensive 8051.

 

[John KD5YI]

The PSoC 3/5 is still pretty bad. It seems they didn't think there
was a market for even a decent delta-sigma converter.

On the first page of PSoC3: CY8C34 Family Data Sheet it says...

Configurable Delta-Sigma ADC with 12-bit resolution
? Programmable gain stage: x0.25 to x16
? 12-bit mode, 192 ksps, 70 dB SNR, 1 bit INL/DNL

FYI

Cheers,
John

 

[krw]

On the first page of PSoC3: CY8C34 Family Data Sheet it says...

I know what it says.

Configurable Delta-Sigma ADC with 12-bit resolution

12-bit? Gack! Now, tell me about the DAC that goes along with it.

? Programmable gain stage: x0.25 to x16
? 12-bit mode, 192 ksps, 70 dB SNR, 1 bit INL/DNL

Crap.