• Locked Locked
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Subscribers 80 subscribers
  • Views 697 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

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.

EETimes "Who has the lowest power MCU?"

TonyKao
Genius 3770 points


Here we go... again.

http://eetimes.com/electronics-blogs/other/4370908/In-search-of-the-lowest-power-MCU

I will note however that Microchip seems to have raised the art of comparing apples to oranges to a whole new level, by combining the storage-standby power of one family, the RTC-standby of a second, and the active power of yet another; the resulting Frankenstein-esque monstrosity beats the MSP430 on every count!

I'm sold. Where can I buy this PIC24+24+16=PIC64?

;)

Tony

  • Expert 1610 points

    Once every year - I remember the contest videos on youtube :-)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NifzpSOlY2k

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoTFD4ngZ_w

    http://www.ti.com/lit/wp/slay015/slay015.pdf

  • Guru 227245 points

    Oh, the Microchip values are correct and valid. They just 'forgot' to count the required power for the robot arm that swaps the CPU based on current operational state :)

    However, the comparisons are interesting.

    The Wolverine has 4 times as much non-volatile memory and also 4 times as much volatile memory, a CPU core with 16 bit instead of 8 bit, faster instructions (so more bang per MHz) and still requires only 3 times the operating current per MHz as the PIC16LF1509.

    I'm sure I can drop the standby current to 0, as the Woverine memory is non-volatile, so if the app is written properly, it can continue form power-up as good as from any sleep mode.

    About the standby with RTC, well, on the Woverine this means including the current for the crystal. The PIC uses an LPRC (something like the VLO) with +-15% accuracy (yes, +-15%!). It can barely be called an RTC. It is an ANTC (almost nearly time clock)
    So 220nA (or even 440nA) for +-15% accuracy compared with 330nA with +-15ppm accuracy.

    Well, the winner is... Microchip. For the most creative reduction of facts to meaningless numbers. I wonder why they haven't bothered to used the sum of digits on their values, to present an even smaller (and even more meaningless) number.

**Attention** This is a public forum