Good quality Audio Codec on TM4C123x

Kummi said:

We are still in the research stage

Doubtful - far more likely that you're in the "investigation" stage.  (just try to tell your taxing authority that your deductions "qualify" as research...)

Appears that your "research" consists of, "dumping the hard work" upon others.   (i.e. Will there be CPU cycles left for other process?)   Should that not be the job of your team?  And - what if 2 CPU cycles remain?   Does not that "meet" your (overly vague) specification.  (yet proves insufficient to do any other (real) MCU work)

Your post's title, "Seek good quality Audio Codec" implies that you'll tightly define that which constitutes, "good quality."  Does you post (ever) attempt that?  Is such a post much motivating to those who, "may be skilled/able to assist?"

L-Pads and Eval boards bearing multiple, candidate devices are the normal/customary means of approaching such new design tasks.  Some of the work must be done by you - and in that process - it's likely that you'll develop far improved "specifications" - for submittal to vendor here...

Amit Ashara said:

You would need to do the emulated I2S over SSI.

Tool to task (mis-match) strongly noted, here!

Can any "emulated I2S" meet poster's quest for, "Good, Quality Audio?"  (and if that's the case - why would (real) I2S peripheral modules even exist?)

Some camels may find a "hump implanted" horse attractive.  (and of good quality)  The majority - I'd bet - would not...  (this point references a similar post - in which a MCU is tasked (beyond) - it's intended, "Sweet-spot.")

Kummi said:

We need some advice on choosing MCU for an audio application.

 Hi Kummi, all your wording show a lot of loss of information and required details, this start AUDIO than Audio Quality.. What level? bandwidth, phase/noise, dynamic range, S/N, acceptable psycho acustic model....

No details about these parameter at all just some word not specific to appropriate language of audio.

Kummi said:

In one of our customer's Audio related application we need to transmit voice data
(with compression and decompression) with low latency, with a sampling rate of about 32KHz
and we would like to if this can be achieved with TIVA C TM4C123xx MCUs or else should we
go for a DSP like C55xx.

 Again, Voice require no quality, method of compression, 32KHz without Word size is less information about quality, again 32KHz is useless if you use 8-10 bit DAC than u/A law codec. MP3 you mention later layer independent is not low latency and asymmetric too.

Kummi said:

1.Which Codec solution is better for the above requirement,
please let us know if anybody tried OPUS(CELT) on TIVA C or else if there are any
other codec options with high quality.

 Again, High quality, what this signify for you?

 Better have bandwidth, noise level, frequency response and what application has to deal with.

 Phone quality? ISDN quality? VOIP HQ? HIFI, HQHIFI ?

Kummi said:

2.As we are new to this field we would like to know how much will be the CPU load
if we implement a Audio Codec(like MP3) on this Cortex-M4@80 MHz and will there be CPU cycles available.

 MP3 is licensed by Fraunhofer and his pricing/numbers scare everyone. Again MP3 layer was for asymmetric audio/video broadcast and is quite useless for audio conversation. MPEG 3 (Symmetrical Very low data rate) was the planned but skipped and adsorbed by MPEG 4 (very low data rate).

 Again your choice is about OPUS no clear idea of OPUS parameter required nor application then:

 Low end parameter:

TIVA can be enough and also an MSP can do the job.

 Mid level:

C55xx series entry is not better than TIVA.

 High level:

 OMAP domain or Multicore DSP less expensive than TIVA and C55xx...

 So please be more specific on application otherwise we cannot help your so vague request.

 Forever if you need help try help us to do same for you through all needed details of case.