• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 2106 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.

LM4 Stellaris Product Lifecycle

Kevin Huffman
Prodigy 50 points
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: MSP430F5529

I need a Stellaris chip with a higher pin count (preferably a device with a total I/O count of 80 or greater).  Digikey Electronics lists a limited number of Stellaris parts in a 144 pin LQFP package that have the higher I/O count.  However none of the products listed appear to be valid TI part numbers on the TI website.  One example is the TI LX4F232H5QDFIGA3 (Digikey stock 296-30293-ND).   Are higher pin count LX4 / LM4 parts at the end of their life cycle?

Any suggestions on alternate (valid) part numbers would be greatly appreciated.  I'd prefer to stay with the Stellaris product line and would prefer to avoid BGA packages. 

  • 0
    Guru 117855 points

    Kevin Huffman said:
    I'd prefer to stay with the Stellaris product line

    You are not alone w/that preference - yet that ship has (long) sailed.    There "is" a Stellaris Forum - and posts there detail the demise & cancellation of that product line.

    I believe the newer TM4C129 family has the best chance of (possibly) meeting your requirement...

  • 0
    TI__Guru**** 244440 points
    Hello Kevin,

    The LM4 and LX4 have been replaced by the TM4C product line. Thus you may not see the same on TI web site.

    Regards
    Amit
  • 0 in reply to Amit Ashara
    Guru 47900 points
    One notes too that while past LX4F enjoys some replacements - far broader LM3S line - has "left the building." Pity as both 28 & 48 pin devices were LM3S - and size constrained applications may not allow the current, 64 pin (smallest device), to fit...
  • 0 in reply to cb1
    Guru 27285 points

     Hi, At first if I am not wrong with LX4F232H5QDFIGA3 is pin to pin replacement by TM4C123XX family, select 144 pin on parametric then search the one best fit.

    cb1- said:
    One notes too that while past LX4F enjoys some replacements - far broader LM3S line - has "left the building." Pity as both 28 & 48 pin devices were LM3S - and size constrained applications may not allow the current, 64 pin (smallest device), to fit...

     Not only but new devices are not pin to pin to nothing than LX4 and no plans seems exists. I use MSP430 with smallest QFP package and competitor are offering smilar M0+ devices on same small package. I checked M0+, MSP430 is not a loser, this industry standard processor has still something to say about and MSP432 seems worst again due to is software/pin compatible with nothing.

  • 0 in reply to Roberto Romano
    Guru 47900 points

    Roberto Romano said:
    I checked M0+, MSP430 is not a loser

    If (only) the vendor shared that belief!     Does not the (total) absence of M0 and M0+ signal strong vendor fear - contrary to your wish/belief?

    ARM is on a long (continuing & unmatched) march - the fact that (so many) vendors license & develop products proves its overwhelming appeal...

  • 0 in reply to cb1
    Guru 27285 points

    cb1- said:
    ARM is on a long (continuing & unmatched) march - the fact that (so many) vendors license & develop products proves its overwhelming appeal...

     Hi CB1, I just wait when I can be able to do a comparative run. I remember old Accorn "adagio" when they sai'd "Motorola user cannot do this" and we done something more and more better.. But very long time elapsed, to say something really unbiased I need know more on M0 and M0+, M0 on power sensitive application is out, about M0+ I need time to evaluate.

     Today knowledge,  MSP430F5529 @25MHz is more fast on IO than TM4C123 @40MHz, clearly TM4C129 @120MHz outperform both of about an order of magnitude.
     Overclocking MSP430 to 48MHz, (test from Zrno Soli showed it can run near 60MHz) MSP is comparable to 129 I/O performance, so using DMA at these speed with 16 bit access outperform TIVA on code size, speed and power. Clearly if you use Floating point TIVA is better but not so much.

     Again I forever leaved Float to DSP and workstation processing, maybe due to my age and longest experience on I am biased to "Integer math instead".

     On another side, DSP specialized like C2000 series or Freescale with special hardware are not domain of simple ARM devices. ARM is gaining popularity due to cell phone market but I don't like so much as it was in the early 80's. So I remember performance of Motorola 88K just outperformed by speed but never by efficiency.