Seems the advantage for F3 is it has LQFP48 package where the smallest for F4 is LQFP64. I thought about F3 but since it can only go up 72MHz, which made me hesitated.
LQFP48 of F3 is very attractive but the RAM size is limited to 48 kbytes. I need more RAM region to calculate the shortest path to the goal precisely. This is the reason why I focus on F4 device.
On the other hand, clock of 72MHz is enough, I think, because F3 also has floating point unit. It will accelerate the calculation of my control program.
Yeah, ram is a big issue,unless you write everything very conservatively. Glad Kato can survive with 20K Ram on his tetra :) I am exciting about the high clock speed of F4 even with only internal OSC, it literary double the compute speed of my path generator and flood fill since I on purposely made everything integer(in this case FPU doesn't help at all), still F103 is good so far. I am looking forward to see your new half size mouse with AS5040 or similar encoder working!
3 件のコメント:
Seems the advantage for F3 is it has LQFP48 package where the smallest for F4 is LQFP64. I thought about F3 but since it can only go up 72MHz, which made me hesitated.
LQFP48 of F3 is very attractive but the RAM size is limited to 48 kbytes. I need more RAM region to calculate the shortest path to the goal precisely. This is the reason why I focus on F4 device.
On the other hand, clock of 72MHz is enough, I think, because F3 also has floating point unit. It will accelerate the calculation of my control program.
Yeah, ram is a big issue,unless you write everything very conservatively. Glad Kato can survive with 20K Ram on his tetra :) I am exciting about the high clock speed of F4 even with only internal OSC, it literary double the compute speed of my path generator and flood fill since I on purposely made everything integer(in this case FPU doesn't help at all), still F103 is good so far. I am looking forward to see your new half size mouse with AS5040 or similar encoder working!
コメントを投稿