Forum Rule: Always post complete source code & details to reproduce any issue!
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: STM32 F7 , 5v tol IO M7 Arm

  1. #1

    STM32 F7 , 5v tol IO M7 Arm

    Don't suppose anyone is looking at the STM 32 F7 range

    http://www.st.com/content/st_com/en/...m32f779ni.html

    Arm , M7 , 200 Plus MHz, 5v tolerant IO ,

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    St. Petersburg, FL
    Posts
    149
    I want one now, no four. But who will write the libraries and will they be done in my lifetime. If Paul has to do this along with all his other great work then his brain will explode.

    The UltimaDuino does look really nice though.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    579
    The ST libaries are pretty horrible though. At least the HAL ones. The standard peripheral libraries are okay

    There's no adjustable offset for DMA which was a killer for my application

    The STM32F4's are pretty similar to the K20s
    Last edited by Xenoamor; 06-06-2016 at 01:27 PM.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    St. Petersburg, FL
    Posts
    149
    My needs are in the ADC area where a quad synced set running at 100Ksps at 12-bit would really solve some issues.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    So. Calif
    Posts
    2,828
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenoamor View Post
    The ST libaries are pretty horrible though. At least the HAL ones. The standard peripheral libraries are okay

    There's no adjustable offset for DMA which was a killer for my application

    The STM32F4's are pretty similar to the K20s
    based on my extensive use of ST's HAL for 8 or IO devices, in complex apps, I have to disagree with the generalization.

    But this is Not applicable to current Teensy and next.

  6. #6
    Senior Member onehorse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Danville, California
    Posts
    920
    There is this.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by onehorse View Post
    There is this.
    Quad SPI and an FSMC.... very interesting
    I'll give ST's HAL another go in the coming days. It's the stm32cube code generation I really don't like
    Last edited by Xenoamor; 06-08-2016 at 09:23 AM.

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    2
    Noob here.
    Why PJRC is not considering to use STM32H7 for T4?
    https://www.st.com/en/microcontrolle...oductId=SS1951

  9. #9
    Senior Member+ Frank B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany NRW
    Posts
    4,744
    Why should PJRC consider it?
    (The NXP i.MX RT is way faster, too)

  10. #10
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    2
    Thank you for the information.

    I see that the official dev boards are quite expensive than ST's Nucleo.
    So I have the impression that the device price is pricey too.
    It is also not commonly ported to Arduino and Micropython.

    Can you point me to any cheap dev boards that is also ported to Arduino and Micropython.
    I am quite new to NXP.

  11. #11
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    18,654
    Nucleo, Discovery, and ST's other loss-leader products are precisely the reason why you're not going to see independent hardware vendors who actually invest in independent software development support ST's chips.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •