| ??? 09/01/06 06:44 Read: times Msg Score: 0 +1 Informative -1 Overrated |
#123487 - Nebulous question Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Considering the hc11 series is obsolete! Which is more powerful? In what regard? Execution speed, ease of coding?
In their original forms neither were particularly fast. If you were to compare a latter day 1clock 8051 vs an old 8Mhz hc11, then the 8051 will win hands down in performance. Architecture wise, the hc11 was more like a general purpose processor whereas the 8051 was specifically controller oriented. I have done many 1000's of lines of assembler in both - they each have their advantages and disadvantages. In many cases, you could choose either and the net result would be the same. The HC11 has been replaced with the HC12. Freescale have some parts with a lot of flash and ram. Is it more powerful than the 8051? Again depends on what exact parts we are talking about. I have two cars, one car has a HC11F1 in its engine management system to other has a 80C517 in its. One is made by Delco, the other by Bosch. What does this prove? Only that they do much the same thing. Personally, I like the architecture of the Motorola(Freescale) cpus. It's very nice to write assembler in - probably nicer than 8051 and AVR (we won't mention PIC). Even when I moved to the AVR, I initially thought it weed all over the 8051, but after some experience I found the 8051 has certain features that come in handy. To compare - you must be very specific about the comparison otherwise it comes down to personal opinion. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| motorola versus 8051 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Nebulous question | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| all | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Wile E. Coyote | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| It's not a 65HC11! It's 68HC11! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ergo... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| QED | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| QED ?? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Q.E.D. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| QEF | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Maarten has got it right | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Latin... and I thought this was an english forum | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You've got to expand your horizons. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No way... I\'m going to be in missery... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Latin is more useful than C? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| QED | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| QED v Q.E.D. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| MIPS? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Processing power | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| instruction set | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Architecture and Instruction Set | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not really | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| It does depend on the instruction set. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RISC? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RISC! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| one instr. / cycle | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| multiple instrcutions per cycle | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
None of this stops the mfg from calling it a RISC | 01/01/70 00:00 |