←back to thread

700 points elipsitz | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.014s | source
Show context
elipsitz ◴[] No.41191100[source]
Can’t find an official announcement or datasheet yet, but according to this post:

* 2x Cortex-M33F * improved DMA * more and improved PIO * external PSRAM support * variants with internal flash (2MB) and 80 pins (!) * 512KiB ram (double) * some RISC-V cores? Low power maybe?

Looks like a significant jump over the RP2040!

replies(6): >>41192138 #>>41192255 #>>41192268 #>>41192281 #>>41192896 #>>41198083 #
repelsteeltje ◴[] No.41192281[source]
... And RP2354A/B even has 2MB built in flash!
replies(1): >>41201737 #
1. andylinpersonal ◴[] No.41201737[source]
Indeed an in-package winbond flash die though.
replies(1): >>41209671 #
2. jacobmarble ◴[] No.41209671[source]
Please explain. What is a better alternative that could have been chosen?

I’m just happy to have one fewer component on my boards.

replies(1): >>41219074 #
3. jercos ◴[] No.41219074[source]
Downside is it occupies a CS on the QSPI controller, presumably bonding to the same pads as the QSPI pins on the package, so now you only have one external memory IC. It's a very small tradeoff all things considered, but is still technically a tiny disadvantage over highly integrated MCUs.

A potential alternative would have been a directly memory-mapped NOR flash die, but that would have required more bond wires, more dedicated pads on the die, a port on the bus, and on top of that the memory die would have been more expensive too.

An older (and often impractical) alternative is to use a single die with both flash and SoC on, in the same process. This usually forces a larger-than-desired process node to match the flash technology, making the SoC take up more space. The result requires no extra bond wires or pads, but now you're really manufacturing a flash chip with an MCU attached.