what's more simplist and better PIC16f84 or ATMEL
2006-09-23 08:15:40 · 3 answers · asked by Viper 1 in Consumer Electronics ➔ Other - Electronics
I think Atmel is better than PIC (microchip), but then again, I learned Intel assembly so it only stands to reason. They both are used widely in the embedded world.
I think Atmel would be better for a beginner because Intel assembly is used across many different vendors (Philips, Cygnal, Atmel, etc.), where PIC has its own assembly and can only be used on a Microchip controller.
Yes, you can do your apps in C, which will eliminate the assembly differences, but you still need to know the architecture in order to set up the micro's registers and peripherals. So if you know Atmel, you know the other Intel based processors too.
2006-09-24 03:27:02 · answer #1 · answered by justme 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most people say pic has more info, tutorials, and project code on the web. But atmel seems to be gaining ground. The main reason I started with pic is because the hardware programmer seemed easier to make. I probably don't understand atmel that well, but it seems to me you need to make ten connections to program the little buggers.
Also, atmel chips don't seem to be as easy to buy/sample in small quantities.
16f84 is obsolete. The 16f628/648 is it's cheaper replacement with more memory and internal oscillator. Actually, the 16f88 will be not much harder to use and can do much more than the others mentioned.
Picaxe is also pretty kewl and a hella lot easier to start with than either of the above. It's like a cheapo Basic Stamp with onboard peripherals to boot. It doesn't get any simpler.
2006-09-23 14:20:23 · answer #2 · answered by wordnerd27x 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
ATMEL is seriously easy to use and a great beginners tool
2006-09-23 08:23:42 · answer #3 · answered by Joe_Floggs 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋