Home    Bloggers    Messages    Webinars    Resources   
Tw  |  Fb  |  In  |  Rss
Jacek Hanke

Is the 8051 MCU Still in the Game?

Jacek Hanke
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Jacek Hanke
Jacek Hanke
6/15/2012 8:20:24 AM
User Rank
Blogger
Re: I want to look "under the hood"
And last but not least - Max (BTW, sorry everyone for taking so long to respond - I was off to visit DAC..)

So, Max - I must regretfully say, that we will rather keep the details for ourselves... ;) Nevertheless, If you do end up visiting Poland, you are more than welcome to visit us, we will happily show you, what our 8051 can achieve!

50%
50%
Jacek Hanke
Jacek Hanke
6/15/2012 8:06:40 AM
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Many 8051 Projects under the Belt
William - you are right. There is still many applications requiring simple, but powerful 8 bit microcontrollers, so I believe, that many engineers will enjoy working with our solution. I can clearly see, that most or even all the electronic engineers worldwide have experience with the 8051. This is why this construction is still popular, and projects like the DQ8051 will surely remain the best solution for many applications...

50%
50%
Jacek Hanke
Jacek Hanke
6/15/2012 7:42:57 AM
User Rank
Blogger
Re: DQ8051

Adam - I can say more! Using of the DQ8051 does not require any additional skills from the 851 programmers. It is fully software-compatible with the original 8051. So, the DQ8051 users can still use the same programs, compilers and assemblers. All that is needed, is to be familiar with the FPGA tools or use the ASIC chip with it on board. So far, there in none available on the market, but I believe that some will appear this year.

50%
50%
Jacek Hanke
Jacek Hanke
6/15/2012 7:37:29 AM
User Rank
Blogger
Re: I want one

Duane - The core is technology independent, which means, that you can implement it in any FPGA and ASIC technology. Of course, it allows an implementation of few MCU inside single FPGA device. The only limitation is the size of the FPGA and a number of available RAM blocks.

50%
50%
Jacek Hanke
Jacek Hanke
6/15/2012 7:34:50 AM
User Rank
Blogger
Re: I want to look "under the hood"

 

EdV - nice movie.

I believe that building the slowest 8051 would also be possible with the DQ8051. The features of the core allow the programmers to slow down the memory accesses. It was mainly developed to allow operations with slow memories, but can also be used to slow down the whole processor. Moreover, you can always slow the clock frequency down. Imagine performance of 8051 requiring the 20 CLK periods per instruction clocked with 1 Hz !!! Wouldn't it be the world slowest 8051? 

50%
50%
Jacek Hanke
Jacek Hanke
6/15/2012 7:30:21 AM
User Rank
Blogger
Re: I want to look "under the hood"
 

Paul - I know the performance of the DQ8051 looks amazing.

The architecture speed improvement was achieved by execution of Dhrystone 2.1 benchmark, and I believe it is one of the most popular and objective ones.

Of course 300 MHz is the processor frequency, so when you multiply it by the architecture improvement, you get the 7,8 GHz of the standard 8051 equivalent frequency. It means, that the original 8051 should be clocked with 7,8 GHz to achieve the same performance as the DQ8051 clocked with 300 MHz... For sure, most of potential users will not even consider using 300MHz to clock the DQ8051 based application. Most of them, will use the 25-100 MHz range , but if some of them would be in need to clock it with such high frequency, the core simply gives that possibility. My experience in DCD shows me, that invention of our cores' users seems to be infinite and the cores are used in applications, that I would've never imagined that they could be suitable for such operations (including 8 bit microcontrollers clocked with over 300 MHz).

50%
50%
EdV
EdV
6/6/2012 11:28:24 PM
User Rank
Guru
Re: I want to look "under the hood"
I was using a Silicon Labs 8051 variant a couple of years ago to acquire two channels of analog data at 1Msps and then convert to a seial bit stream at 115200 baud. 25 MIPS at 25MHZ pretty amazing little chip.  

50%
50%
Paul A. Clayton
Paul A. Clayton
6/6/2012 8:51:14 PM
User Rank
Beginner
Re: I want to look "under the hood"
Since the original 8051 took 1, 2, or 4 (or more?) "machine cycles" to execute an instruction and a machine cycle was 12 clock cycles, just bringing execution speed to one instruction per (clock) cycle would bring more than a 12 fold speedup.

I admit that I am curious where the rest of the speedup comes from. Superscalar execution (performing the operation of more than one instruction at the same time) seems excessive for such a simple processor. (I assume that the 300MHz is the processor frequency and not an input frequency that is multiplied before being fed into the processor.)

A less general speedup mechanism than superscalar execution involves idiom recognition and instruction fusion, where a short sequence of instructions is handled specially by the execution resources effectively transforming multiple instructions into a single internal instruction. (Idiom recognition by itself can be useful for optimizing execution. Many x86 processors recognize "xor self" as a zeroing that can cut dependency chains and "call next_instruction; pop return_address" as a method to load the instruction pointer while avoiding corruption of the return address predictor stack.)

The speedup presented might also be the peak speedup, e.g., using primarily or only instructions that take 4 machine cycles on the original 8051 would allow a 48 fold speedup "just" by using single cycle execution.

It is not clear that there is much justification for a speed at (almost) any cost 8051 (unlike x86--and even x86 implementations do not have unlimited development budgets), but I am surprised that even a 300MHz 8051 is justified.  (Note that I do not have any involvement in embedded systems development.)

50%
50%
EdV
EdV
6/4/2012 12:27:57 PM
User Rank
Guru
Re: I want one
Rank beginner appear to apply to my youTube embedding ability as well.  Here is a plain old link type link(that you copy then paste. . not click and go):

http://youtu.be/GdZxbmEHW7M

 

50%
50%
EdV
EdV
6/4/2012 12:26:02 PM
User Rank
Guru
Re: I want one
"To have the worlds fastest FPGA 8051 core is very exciting."


My goal continues to be to make world's slowest 8051 that would still have a market niche other than educational.  The drum sequencer in Google Play's advertisement intrigues me

 

Let's see if it posted:

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GdZxbmEHW7M?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GdZxbmEHW7M?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

 

 

 

50%
50%
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
More Blogs from Jacek Hanke
In this blog we can share our experiences on the topic: "What kind of support can I get from you?"
In order to implement the components of a new chip design, any IP core should be delivered with everything needed to design, test, and validate that core in the target product.
An IP vendor's portfolio should cover the types of cores and designs it can offer, along with previous customers who can share their success stories.
A knowledgeable and skilled IP core development team will always be able to adapt to new requirements based on previous experience.
If you are interested in licensing a third-party IP core, it's a good idea to ensure that the vendor can also supply you with the debugger. The ideal situation is to obtain the debugger together with the IP core -- all from one vendor.
flash poll
follow us on twitter
follow Xilinx on twitter
like us on facebook
like Xilinx on facebook
All Programmable Planet     About Us     Contact Us     Help     Register     Twitter     Facebook     RSS