• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Subscribers 98 subscribers
  • Views 375 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.

comparison between 80188 and C6672

Wenjun Huang
Expert 1770 points

I have used Intel 80188 processor in my schooling time and the architecture of Intel 80188 is quite different from C6672. Maybe due to its simplified interface.

In 80188, there are address, data, and control lines coming out of a processor. Hence, all the peripheral that I want to control (using the 80188), I will connect the address or Chip Select, data, and control line to the peripherals.

in C6672, there are no generic address, data and control lines. What are available are specific module address, data and control lines (such as DDR and EMIF16). This results in more pins on the C6672 (841pins compared to 68 pins on the 80188)?

Just to confirm my understanding, the reason for the 2 different architecture is due to the frequency of operation of the 2 processors (c6672 and 80188). 80188 uses a bus architecture and a particular address will activate only 1 peripheral, whereas c6672 uses a point-to-point architecture. For example, c6672 has dedicated lines running to DDR3 RAM, and dedicated lines running to EMIF16 nand rom. This will minimize chances of error data writing to the DDR3 SDRAM chips when the processor is accessing the flash ROM? Or is it due to the need to do pipelining, the c6672 can write to the DDR3 SDRAM at the same time as reading from the flash rom?

Another implementation question is:

Is there a external bus (with address, data, control lines) for the c6672 that I could use to control other peripherals (like LED, keypad, UART, PPI, LCD)? 

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 30825 points

    It's hard to compare a DSP to a general purpose processor built 30yrs ago.  Even comparing the C66x family to the C6201 (15yrs old now) is hard to compare as many of the peripherals are not the same. 

    Things such as address range and data widths have vastly changed over the years.

    The C6671/2/4/8 devices being the highest performance DSPs in our family have focused it's peripheral sets more on being able to pipeline large amounts of data from systems into and out of the device.  High speed SerDes based interfaces (SRIO, PCIe, SGMII and HyperLink) are at the forefront in this area.  There was not a focus on connecting ADC/DAC, SD/Flash Cards, HDD/SATA on the device as other devices in our DSP families tend to fill these needs such as the DaVinci family and the DM816x.

    You could control things like LED's using the GPIO's.  It does have a UART which can give you the flexibility of some other lower performance interface mixes.

    Best Regards,

    CHad

  • 0 in reply to Chad Courtney
    Expert 1770 points

    Okay, Just want to draw analogy from previous project done using 80188.

    So, I conclude that there is no external bus (with address, data, control line for interfacing with peripherals like keypad, ADC). In order to do that, I would need to use C6672 to control another processors like DaVinci family and the DM816x evaluation board. C66's primary focus is for high speed data transfer using SerDes-based interfaces like SRIO, PCIe, SGMII and Hyperlink.

    Thanks for the sharing.