[Efi332] alternate processors

[Andrei Chichak]

At 01:27 PM 1/3/2007, you wrote:
>Andrei,
>Is your '332 project a new one or the same that you guys had 
>previously?  Have you guys plunged into anything using the eTPU?

No, and yes, ummm. I did the evaluation of processors back in 2000 
for the previous medical equipment project. Subsequently all the 
engineering staff were deemed redundant and 3 of us started our own 
development and consulting business. Just recently we bought a heap 
of the '332 processor boards and I am currently working on an 
environmental project with them.

As for the eTPU, while I was doing the medical gig I kept in contact 
with Axiom Manufacturing, who make most of the demonstration boards 
for Freescale, and I had a look at the MCF5235. I thought it made a 
really nice replacement for the '332 - 2 TPUs, lots of speed, hummana 
hummana hummana, but WHAT THE HECK??? the second TPU is on the same 
pins as the ethernet - DOH! Perhaps in the future when I get forced. 
That would mean putting together another tool chain (I have 
m68k-elf-gcc, Cygwin et. al. working with Eclipse and P&Es debugger) 
and I would have to figure out how to program the eTPU and if it 
included a $3K compiler I'd pass.

>Bigstuff3's processor comparison is interesting. His Gen1 system 
>reportedly used dual Motorola processors (332's?), but he must have 
>switched to Infineon with the gen3. Makes me wonder what drove that 
>decision since as you point out, it would probably have been an 
>easier transition to the MPC5xx or perhaps the Coldfire w/eTPU.

There could be a couple of things going on here, he could have been 
using HC16s without the TPU which would have no great follow on, and 
considering that the C16x series seems to be 16 bit processors, it 
would be a smaller jump than to a PowerPC. Second, a lot of main 
stream people are using the MPC5xx and Bigstuff3 might have been 
looking for some way to distinguish his product from the others. 
Third, he could have lost his programmer and got someone else with a 
different set of prejudices - kind of the tail wagging the dog. Or it 
could be that he had to re-architect his system to avoid getting sued by FAST.

>  I haven't done any research on it but based on how he ranks it 
> relative to the '332, I imagine the SAB C16X on par with the 5xx, 
> and below the 55xx.

It could be based on bogo-mips or some looks good on paper measure. 
Doesn't a 33Mhz RISC box run almost twice the speed of a 20Mhz CISC 
box? Not necessarily?

Andrei