• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 1 reply
  • Subscribers 98 subscribers
  • Views 303 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.

66AK2H14: TMS320C6678 vs. 66AK2H14 in terms on Software Development Complexity?

joe lindula
Mastermind 6930 points
Part Number: 66AK2H14
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TMS320C6678,

Hello, I would like to ask the forum members how much more complex is the TMS320C6678 with only 8 DSP cores and the 66AK2H14 with 8-DSP cores and 4-ARM cores in terms of software development? How much more complex is adding only 4 cores to a processor drive up the software development complexity? How much of a big deal is it trying to manages a DSP core and an ARM core? Can OpenMP solve this complex problem?

Last, if you are not planning of using an embedded OS is it just better to stay with the TMS320C6678? 

All comments are appreciated in regards to these two processors?

Respectfully,

Joe

  • 0
    TI__Guru**** 161600 points
    Hi Joe,

    Last, if you are not planning of using an embedded OS is it just better to stay with the TMS320C6678?

    You can run an embedded OS, TI RTOS, on TMS320C6678. You cannot run linux.

    I would like to ask the forum members how much more complex is the TMS320C6678 with only 8 DSP cores and the 66AK2H14 with 8-DSP cores and 4-ARM cores in terms of software development?


    I wouldn't say it is more complex. Basically both devices use the same Processor SDK RTOS, the 66AK2H14 adds the option to use ARM to control some of the peripherals.

    Can OpenMP solve this complex problem?


    OpenMP is a good tool to ease the parallel programming on both devices. Here is the intro documentation for OpenMP:
    downloads.ti.com/.../intro.html

    Best Regards,
    Yordan