• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 10 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 57 subscribers
  • Views 3248 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.

Difference between CC2650 and CC2538?

Patrick16
Intellectual 270 points
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: CC2538, CC2650, Z-STACK

Hi,

I noticed that TI just released a new multistandard SoC CC2650. I was wondering if I can consider to replace the CC2538 with this new chip. I also assume the functionality of CC2538 is the subset of CC2650 because CC2650 can also support Bluetooth PHY? 

Specifically, I would like to know if the following statements are true:

  • Multistandard Hardware and Software Support
    • CC2650 can support ZigBee, 6LoWPAN, and Bluetooth. TI supports software to make these technologies work with CC2650.
Development Tool:
  • CC2650DK can opt to use CCS IDE or GNU compiler for Z-Stack software development; however, Z-Stack for CC2538DK can only use IAR EWA for development.
  • Mesh Networking Configuration:
    • CC2650EM (with just 3V batteries) can work standalone as the  CC2538EM. This means if I purchase multiple CC2650EMKs (with proper firmware and batteries), I can make them form a mesh network.

Thanks.

P.

  • 0
    Guru 735685 points
    1. Yes, CC2650 supports multiple standards such as Zigbee, 6lowPan, BLE, etc...
    2. As I know, TI BLE stack can be compiled by CCS but Z-Stack is not yet.
    3. CC2650EM can work standalone like CC2538EM without problem.
  • 0 in reply to YiKai Chen
    TI__Genius 16570 points
    Hi,
    yes CC2650 can support different standards: ZigBee, 6LoWPAN or BLE. Choice can be made at compile time, and TI offers the 3 different stacks.
    BLE-SDK offers CCS support for application development, while Z-Stack SDK only supports IAR for the moment.
    CC2650 is a device that is targeted to be used for battery powered application (end device) thanks to its ultra-low power performance and capabilities in a single chip configuration. I would recommend using CC2538EM for single chip routers as there's more RAM available so it can scale better with network size. For coordinators, since those are typically implemented in a dual-chip architecture, you can use CC2650 as ZNP.
    To drive ZNP, you can use whether Z-tool and some of the example scripts delivered with the release and available in C:\ti\simplelink\zstack_home_1_02_02_42930\Tools\Z-Tool\Scripts, or the ZNP host SW framework reference design: www.ti.com/.../tidc-znp-host-sw3

    Thanks,
    TheDarkSide
  • 0 in reply to TheDarkSide
    Intellectual 270 points

    TheDarkSide said:
    Hi,
    yes CC2650 can support different standards: ZigBee, 6LoWPAN or BLE. Choice can be made at compile time, and TI offers the 3 different stacks.
    BLE-SDK offers CCS support for application development, while Z-Stack SDK only supports IAR for the moment ...

    Thank you for your detailed answer. For the Z-Stack SDK, is there a plan for supporting CCS in the future? Switching between CCS and IAR is not only inconvenient but also costly in terms of license fees.

    Another related question is the roadmap question of CC2538 and CC2650. If I want to choose one solution for the scale-up mesh networking solution kit, my understanding is CC2538EM is better as a router compared to CC2650EM. But CC2650EM or CC2650-based SimpleLink™ SensorTag are good options for end devices. In this case, I may consider buying both. However, my concern is maybe CC2538 will phase out sooner than CC2650 in terms of support and production lifetime?


    Thanks.

  • 0 in reply to Patrick16
    Guru 735685 points
    CC26xx is much more power saving than CC253x so it is suitable for ZED which is powered by battery. CC2538 is suitable for ZR or ZC because it has large flash. So, CC26xx won't have a shorter lifespan.
  • 0 in reply to YiKai Chen
    Intellectual 270 points
    Thanks for your prompt answer again.

    Sorry, what I meant is CC2538 would have shorter lifespan... I have edited my post.
  • 0 in reply to Patrick16
    Guru 735685 points
    As I know, you don't have to worry about it.
  • 0
    Expert 1525 points
    From our experience, the cc2538 and the cc2650 both has excellent power saving properties and may well survive for a long time on batteries. We run 6lowpan mesh networks on them, and while the cc2650 is more challenged RAM-wise, it's still possible with large networks several hops deep. It all depends on your application and your requirements. The Contiki OS has great support for both cc2538 and cc2650 and contains a 6lowpan stack that can be compiled with GCC, eg the GCC maintained by ARM employees at launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded.

    Note that with the 6lowpan stack in Contiki, no device has to be fully on even if they can be. Even routing devices are sleepy devices, ie duty cycling the radio. A gateway typically is always on as it likely connected to a power source like mains power anyway. So, even with batteries you may have multi-hop networks that route packets back and forth, and the flash of even the cc2650 is well enough to cover both this routing functionality and applications.

    Just wanted to offer an alternative. Best of luck,
    Marcus
  • 0 in reply to mslothy
    Guru 735685 points
    According to datasheet,
    CC2650 CC2538
    Active-Mode RX: 5.9 mA 20 mA
    Active-Mode TX at 0 dBm: 6.1 mA 24 mA

    I think CC2650 is more power saving than CC2538.
  • 0 in reply to YiKai Chen
    Expert 1525 points
    Yeah, they are really low-power, and the cc2650 impressively so. Another thing we really like with the cc2650 is the ability to send BLE beacons, we use those to speed up the commissioning process from a smartphone.
  • 0 in reply to mslothy
    Guru 735685 points
    Yes, CC2650 can do 802.15.4 and BLE dual mode is a wonderful thing and big different to other chips.