• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Subscribers 52 subscribers
  • Views 4193 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

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.

cc2640 vs cc2541 differences

kazola
Guru 18515 points
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: CC2541, CC2640

Good afternoon!

I want to decide between the CC2640 and the cc2541. Because of this, I would like your opinion on several subjects :)

  1. Where do the power savings in RF come from? In other words, why does cc2541 require so much power compared to cc2640?
  2. How is it possible having 2 ARM in cc2640 consumes a similar value than 8051-based cc2541? I'm not an architecture guy so be kind here ;)
  3. I guess the change to simpleLink came from the need for more memory to fulfill v4.1 and v4.2 features and requirements. I heard cc2640 handles most of v4.1 and it will be able to manage v4.2. What about cc2541 for these two versions?
  4. How many BLE devices may handle the cc2640? There was a limit of.... 3 (AFAIR) in cc2541?
  5. Does the RTOS in cc2640 provide a huge difference in application performance? :) I'm more interested in your subjective opinion here, the "feeling" you have when debugging and running your applications.
  6. Which is the future of cc2541 at TI? In other words, should we discard this chip for new designs? I guess I will be able to extract this information from your previous answers but let me know them explicitly ;)
  7. I'm also interested in any additional thought and/or opinion and/or interesting issue I have not asked about and you may tell me! :)

Well, have the nicest day! :)

  • 0
    TI__Guru** 106705 points

    Hi Kazola,

    1) Basically because the radio is totally redesigned.
    2) This is just because the modern ARM processors are more efficient than the old 8051. Additionally we are using new production process, new technology, etc. Adding a built-in DCDC regulator also increases efficiency. Keep in mind though, that none of the numbers in the datasheet are for running both cores simultaneously.
    3) You are correct on CC2640. CC2541 will not be able to fulfill all of 4.1 due to RAM limitations.
    4) Our current number is 8
    5) Everything is faster in the CC2640 compared to the CC2541. Really.
    6) The CC2541 will still be supported by us. We also plan to update the BLE stack for CC254x to 1.4.1 this year. It you prefer a device that have been in the market for several years and is mature, and you can live with the current consumption and the 8051 core, the CC2541 is still a good part to use.
    7) You can get the CC26xx SensorTag for $29 with a low cost debugger for just additional $15. Get a kit and check it out!

    Cheers,
    Fredrik

  • 0 in reply to Fredrik K
    Guru 18515 points
    Thanks Fredrik :)
  • 0 in reply to Fredrik K
    Guru 735545 points
    Cool insights!