cc2640 vs cc2541 differences
Good afternoon!
I want to decide between the CC2640 and the cc2541. Because of this, I would like your opinion on several subjects :)
- Where do the power savings in RF come from? In other words, why does cc2541 require so much power compared to cc2640?
- 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 ;)
- 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?
- How many BLE devices may handle the cc2640? There was a limit of.... 3 (AFAIR) in cc2541?
- 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.
- 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 ;)
- 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! :)
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
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
- The multi-standard CC2650 wireless MCU supports BLE as well as other wireless protocols, such as 802.15.4. The CC2640 supports Bluetooth Low Energy only.
- The CC2640 & BLE-Stack v2.0.0 supports BT4.1. At this time, TI has not made any announcements regarding CC2640 support or capability of BT specifications beyond BT4.1.
沒有留言:
張貼留言