Forum Rule: Always post complete source code & details to reproduce any issue!
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5
Results 101 to 112 of 112

Thread: Suggest next Teensy with Cortex M7

  1. #101
    Moderator Frank B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Germany NRW
    wmxz, yes, constants

  2. #102
    Senior Member manitou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Quote Originally Posted by manitou View Post
    Digikey also sells the board ($84, quantity available: 0)
    and presumably MBED will have software support "real soon". I did lots of experimenting with MBED K64 before the T3.5/3.6 beta release.
    I received the NXP 600 mhz cortex M7 evaluation board from digikey. Powered it up and LED's are on, and delivered application changes user LED as board tilts. It's consuming 144 ma. No MBED compiler support yet, so it's only decorative.

  3. #103
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    What is your take on MicoPython?

    I think it is stable enough and Adafruit is pushing it hard. This lowers the bar even farther. I not sure new hobbyist will bother with C.

  4. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulStoffregen View Post
    Solderless breadboard compatibility is essential, but not for every signal. Like Teensy 3.2, 3.5, 3.6 only about 20-40 signals will come to breadboard friendly pins. I'm considering a variety of ideas for how to make the rest available, but honestly, not very concerned about that part at this extremely early stage.

    Like every other conversation about future Teensy, I'm sure there will be plenty of talk about form factors, connectors, pin spacing, and so on. Feel free to discuss. I am listening. But don't for one second imagine I'm going to abandon breadboard compatibility for a high density connector like Intel did with Edison.
    How a high-density flat-cable connector at the end of the board which can connect to a breakout board for all the rest of the signals?
    This could also work as a solder-free way to attach prop shields, audio boards and other fun stuff.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulStoffregen View Post
    Many questions. Here's some quick answers...

    Only NXP can say for sure about their memory design choices, but it's easy to imagine the likely answer: cost.

    I need to be careful about the NDA, so I'm not going to comment about questions involving the chip's details or anything I might know about their plans for future chips in this product line.

    External SDRAM is one of the very difficult choices for a new Teensy. The situation is similar to Teensy 3.6, where FlexBus consumes many of the I/O pins and makes several important features unavailable. So I'm leaning against SDRAM (or keeping those pins unused). It simply costs too much, in terms of lost functionality.

    My hope is to move towards integrating conditionally compiled semaphone or mutux support into the core library and many of the most commonly used Arduino libs. I do not intend to make any RTOS mandatory, but quite a lot could be done in the many libraries so they work much better when used with an RTOS. This is the sort of thing best discussed on its own thread. But I will say right now, the 2 limiting factors are dev time to do this, and having RTOS users willing to help test unstable/alpha/beta code. Both of these always seem so elusive...

    Release of bootloader chips and a reference board will almost certainly look similar to prior times. Never before have I managed to get these done right at the Teensy board's release. There's always a ton of stuff to do leading up to the release, and then usually a few months of highly urgent software work following. I'm pretty sure a first Cortex M7 board will be similar.
    All the applications involving camera in the official NXP examples use the SDRAM. Would it be possible to use the internal SRAM as a temporary buffer for these applications? Or even a QSPI flash?

  6. #106
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulStoffregen View Post
    Ok, maybe it's time to drop a hint about future Teensy.... (hope everyone is sitting down)

    This chip is very likely to become the core of Teensy 4.0 sometime in 2018.

    Yes, you're reading that right, a 600 MHz Cortex-M7 is coming!
    Wow, this is fantastic, I had not read this message and coincidentally a few days ago I was reading about the i.MX RT1020 on the NXP website, to use it in some of my new developments, it also seems interesting the i.MX 233 although this It is older.

    If using an NXP RT in the new Teensy 4.0 would be great, I currently use Teensy 3.6 to test and debug my developments before making custom PCBs with MK66 LQFP and I find it very useful.

    It would be interesting if you can maintain some compatibility between Teensy 3.6 and Teensy 4.0, although I suppose it will be difficult because they look like very different microcontrollers, MK66 vs. i.MX RT.

    I'm following the NXP website on the RT1020, but not yet available, only the RT1050.

    Does anyone know the RT1050 is compatible with RT1020? I guess Teensy 4.0 will install RT1050, so a BGA. If there is software compatibility between RT1050 and RT1020, I will use Teensy 4.0 to develop and test software, and custom boards with RT1020 LQFP.

    Some news about when Teensy 4.0 will be available, price, libraries, compatibility, confirmed that you will use an i.MX RT1050 ...?


  7. #107

    Thank you so much for all the work you do. I love the Teensy 3.6. And I'm excited to hear about the future of Teensy with the Cortex M7 Teensy 4.0. Sounds awesome. Thanks for sharing a glimpse into the Teensy future.
    I know it's still early, but are you thinking that it will have the same physical size as the 3.6? Or will it be a different form factor?


  8. #108
    Robert - end physical attributes not clear yet - discussion on this thread: Any-Plans-for-a-Teensy-Board-with-Bottom-Pads-on-Top

    Maybe T_3.6 - maybe T_3.6++ - maybe a second unit like T_3.2 size ...

  9. #109
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    uhm, post #3 replicated by a 2 post user, why?

  10. #110
    Quote Originally Posted by tonton81 View Post
    uhm, post #3 replicated by a 2 post user, why?
    A lurking Spammer was my guess - I didn't see the dupe - but single other post was of little value as well. Wasn't sure it was worth banning yet?

  11. #111
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    i remembered it cuz i said it :P

    yeah its weird, he/she/it was sitting on the forums since november, makes me wonder how many bots are chilling here :P

  12. #112
    Moderator Theremingenieur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Colmar, France
    My inner cleaning woman (she is German!) told me that it was better to disinfect that now...

Posting Permissions

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