• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Subscribers 80 subscribers
  • Views 2025 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.

MSP432E401Y: MSP432E401Y - pin to pin replacement for TM4C129ENCPDT

Bruno Saraiva
Guru 13040 points
Part Number: MSP432E401Y
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TM4C1294NCPDT, TM4C129ENCPDT, CC3120,

Gentlemen,

I am usually active in the TM4C forum, although my first commercial projects were actually with MSP430's... It appears it is time to "come back" to the MSP community!

Several of our projects use TM4C1294NCPDT, and later, the crytpo equivalent TM4C129ENCPDT. Having trouble to purchase the 1294 chip this week, and having already heard of the new 120MHz MSP's, I decided to take a deeper look into the possibility.

Well, it seems that the IC's are EXACTLY the same product. They are pin to pin compatible, the muxing options for each pins are the same (as far as I had the patience to compare two datasheets), all peripherals are the same, memory identical... Given the fact that the MSP432 package is -40°C to +105°C, it actually relates to the T3 suffix on the TM4C device (the "best" out of the production line), and it is even a bit cheaper then their regular temp version.

Can anyone confirm that it is really the same thing? I've ordered a few samples, and also a launchpad, to give it a try, but apparently it is just a matter of compiling the project for the new family and VOILA! I wonder if the MSPWare syntax will be identical of the TivaWare? Any comments and suggestions are mostly welcome!

Regards

Bruno

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 26380 points
    Bruno,


    Thanks for posting to the forum.
    The primary difference between the families is that the MSP432E belongs to the SimpleLink family of microcontrollers.
    The MSP432E4 device is enabled by the common core SDK foundation that allows portability across all MCUs in the SimpleLink family (MSP432P4, CC2640R2, CC3220, CC3120 devices). The MSP432E4 SDK provides a set of functional drivers called TI Drivers that minimize the need to use lower level abstraction layers such as Driver Library.

    For anyone using the MSP432E4 devices, we recommend only using the MSP432E4 SDK & not other (unsupported) software packages.
    www.ti.com/.../SIMPLELINK-MSP432E4-SDK

    From a pinout standpoint, yes, the MSP432E4 and TM4C129ENCPDT are pin to pin compatible.

    Note that the TM4C129 MCUs are not compatible with the SimpleLink MCU family, nor offer wireless connectivity compatibility.

    -Priya
  • 0
    TI__Guru**** 244400 points
    Hello Bruno

    Long time since our last correspondence. In addition to what Priya mentioned, there is no MSPWare or TivaWare for the MSP432E4x devices. Though the peripheral driverlib is provided for the MSP432E4x devices, it is strongly advised to use the TI Drivers for the code development
  • 0 in reply to Priya Thanigai
    Guru 13040 points
    Hello Priya,
    Thanks a lot for the reply!
    I would appreciate if you care to explain a bit further what do you mean by "wireless connectivity compatibility", as I noticed no physical hardware/peripheral in MSP432E401Y that would be related to radio communication.
    (And a bit off topic, but I wonder if a .bin compiled for a TM4C would run on this chip?)
    Regards
    Bruno
  • 0 in reply to Amit Ashara
    Guru 13040 points
    Greetings Amit,

    Indeed long time! You seem to have "abandoned the old sailors" for more tepid waters! Hope you are having fun with the new challenges!

    Thanks for the comment. I downloaded the TI Driver package to take a look while my 432E4 Launchpad doesn't arrive. The driverlib does seem to be identical to what xxxWare uses, even sharing the same macro parameters and so on... That would make porting old code easy. On the other hand, the "suggested" new SDK is totally based in RTOS - correct? - and there won't be running away from it for too long around here (maybe we could cling to the NoRTOS framework module for a bit longer...).

    Cheers

    Bruno
  • 0 in reply to Bruno Saraiva
    TI__Guru**** 244400 points
    Hello Bruno,

    The SDK provides the option to use either RTOS or no-RTOS with the TI Driver approach. This would make code porting easier based on the underlying memory footprint and gives a common framework for code development across the SimpleLink Family of MCUs
  • 0 in reply to Bruno Saraiva
    TI__Mastermind 26380 points
    Bruno,
    My comment on "extending wireless capability" was at a portfolio level.
    We now how a singular SDK that works across all devices in the SL ecosystem which scales across wired & wireless devices.
    When code is developed using the TI Drivers layer, you get 100% code portability between wired & wireless devices.
    Check out www.ti.com/simplelink for more info ....

    You are right in that we do not add any radio peripherals to E4 device.

    As to the off topic question, we don't recommend it. :)

    -Priya

**Attention** This is a public forum