• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 51 subscribers
  • Views 493 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.

CC2652RB: Code conversion from MSP430, MSP432 to CC2652

John-Paul Bedinger
Prodigy 10 points

Part Number: CC2652RB

How similar is the M4F implementation on the CC2652 versus the MSP432, especially in terms of power consumption?

On porting MSP430F code to the MSP432, there is an outlined approach (sla656d) that covers conversion concerns.

Can we follow a similar approach porting from MSP430 code to the M4F core in the CC2652RB, or is there another guide that might be applicable?

Can the frequency of the CC2652 be lowered from 48MHz to conserve power?

Thanks for your help!

  • 0
    TI__Guru**** 220847 points

    Hi John-Paul,

    You can review the datasheets of each device to determine the differences in power consumption based on activity state.  The CC2652RB is difficult to compare with MSP43X devices since it is an Crystal-less BAW Multiprotocol 2.4 GHz Wireless MCU.  I was not able to find the document you referred to, can you please provide a link?  At any rate there is no similar approach for migrating from MSP430 to the CC2652RB.  SCLK_HF must be derived from a 48 MHz source and cannot be divided during runtime operation to conserve power as it is required for radio operation.

    Regards,
    Ryan

  • 0 in reply to Ryan Brown1
    Prodigy 10 points

    Thanks Ryan,

    My apologies, that's the SLAA656D (not sla656d) report "Migrating to the SimpleLink MSP432 Family".

    I think the biggest concern would just be the implementation itself at this point - if we can port code, then we could take some current measurements and compare.

    Does the CC2652RB (with an M4F core) share any libraries or commonality with the MSP432 (also with an M4F core), other than registers, such as compatibility with SimpleLink?

    Regarding the 48MHz source, the CC2652RB has a built in BAW, however, it uses substantial current (up to 80uA) for a very low-power application.

    What are the options to utilize the BAW but lower overall current consumption? Does anything affect how much power it uses? Can it be shutdown or otherwise controlled using an external wakeup? If the latter, is an external crystal required?

    Thanks Again,

    John-Paul

  • 0 in reply to John-Paul Bedinger
    TI__Guru**** 220847 points

    I would expect that TI Driver code (abstracted for peripherals) could easily be migrated between platforms, but Driverlib functions (inherent to device functionality) will be a more difficult task.  You should consider using the CC2652R1 if you do not require the internal BAW, but either option has a similar power consumption profile.

    Regards,
    Ryan

  • 0 in reply to Ryan Brown1
    Prodigy 10 points

    Thanks Ryan,

    We actually would like to use the onboard BAW for space and reliability reasons, but are concerned about increased current. We will consider using the CC2652R1 (or other family members) if we have to go to an external crystal.

    Is there anything in particular that can be done when using the BAW to lower its overall consumption?

  • 0 in reply to John-Paul Bedinger
    TI__Guru**** 220847 points

    Are you utilizing standby/shutdown power modes and how are you determining that the BAW alone consumes 80 uA?  I'm not able to ascertain similar numbers from the datasheet

    Regards,
    Ryan