• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Subscribers 29 subscribers
  • Views 762 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

TMS570LS3134: TMS570LS3134 performance compared to TMS320F28335

Felix Risch25
Intellectual 1110 points
Part Number: TMS570LS3134
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TMS320F28335, , TMS570LC4357

Hello,

one of my customers is asking about the performance of the TMS570LS3134 compared to the TMS320F28335.

On their current project they are using the TMS320F28335 for a motor control application. Now, their requirements changed to ASIL-D and ISO26262 and therefore they are considering the TMS570LS3134 for their new design.

The current implementation with the C2000 is almost on its limit. The new implementation is basically the same. The TMS320 is stated as 150MIPS and the TMS570 with almost 300DMIPS (180MHz times 1.66DMIPS/MHz), are these numbers comparable in this application?

Can you please help me out with that?

Thank you and kind regards,

Felix

  • 0
    TI__Guru 59540 points

    Hi Felix,

    Unfortunately, the LS3134 will not provide the same performance as the C2000 device as it is truly optimized for motor control through its architecture and inclusion of the co-processor. We do have some devices that include some of the same eTimers as the C2K devices such as the LS12xx family or even the more higher performance LC4357 which might be a better fit but, still, the Hercules architecture hasn't been targeted at this application like C2K. It might be well worth your time to discuss your opportunity with the C2K team directly as I know they are also doing some additional work that could be beneficial to your customer and their requirements in regard to ASIL-D/ISO26262.

  • 0 in reply to Chuck Davenport
    TI__Intellectual 1110 points

    Hi Chuck,

    hmm all right. The customer requested the LS12xx family as well. There should be no huge difference, except the N2HET Timer?

    Is there more information, regarding comparability about the TMS570LC4357 available? Thank you, I am in contact with the C2K BU as well.

    Kind regards,

    Felix Risch

  • 0 in reply to Felix Risch25
    TI__Guru 59540 points
    Hello Felix,

    The LS12xx family has the eTimers on it (eQEP, ePWM, eCAP) so this would help if they are already familiar with that IP. Both the LS31xx/21xx and the LS12xx/11xx have the N2HET IP on them. The LS31xx/21xx family will have more memory resources available and all come in both 144pin TQFP and 337 BGA packages.

    The LC4357 device is the latest device so it implements some improvements in performance (up to 300 MHz) and has a cache as well which further improves performance. Although it is the same basic architecture, there were several improvements made to the bus structures and architecture to adapt to the newer Cortex-R5F core w/cache. This device has similar peripherals to the LS12XX device family. The LC4357 has 4MB of flash and there have been some improvements made in its motor control capability (I don't have specific details on this).

    Certainly, Hercules is, most likely, capable of taking care of the needs for your customer and we will be more than happy to do what's needed to support them but I don't think there has been any studies done to explicitly compare the C2K devices to Hercules to highlight the strengths and performance of each controller under standardized constraints.