Forum Rule: Always post complete source code & details to reproduce any issue!
Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 207

Thread: Teensy 4.0 (hypothetical) pin assignments

  1. #51
    Senior Member+ defragster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,969
    From post #16 - PDF linked shows as RT1050
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulStoffregen View Post
    Yup, it's on NXP website. Here's a direct link.

    https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/referenc...MXRT1050RM.pdf

    3563 pages of light reading.....

    It also seems to be riddled with copy-and-paste errors, mostly stuff from other iMX chips.

  2. #52
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    18,502
    Quote Originally Posted by mjs513 View Post
    but which i.MX RT version will the new T4 be using, 1050 or 1060.
    We'll be using the 1052 at first. 1060 isn't shipping yet, and there isn't even a datasheet or manual available at this point.

    While it's hard to predict the future, and I can't disclose anything I might know that isn't on their public website, I can tell you we'll very likely skip the 1060 and make another high-end board early next year with whatever comes after 1060. Again, if I know anything about what may be coming next, it'd be under NDA until they publish the info on their website. But it shouldn't be much of a shocker to anticipate they'll add more chips over time....

  3. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,890
    @defragster. Missed that for some reason. Think my eyes are going.

    @PaulStoffregen Thanks for the added info Paul. Thought you might be planning a couple of versions. Didn't think of about skipping the 1060 altogether though. Completely understand about the NDA issue so no further questions on that one.

    P.S. If you do a kickstarter campaign again will be posting it on the forum so we all go and support it. Guess I am beginning to get excited about the T4

  4. #54
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    18,502
    Robin & I are undecided about whether to launch on Kickstarter or any other crowd funding site. At least a few people have recommended Crowd Supply. I still don't have an idea whether they have nearly the reach of Kickstarter.

    The thing I really don't like about Kickstarter is the ongoing customer service problems. Would you believe just yesterday one of the backers from 2016 contacted me asking to cancel their pledge and get a refund?! We shipped their package over 1 1/2 years ago! USPS doesn't even keep the tracking info nearly that long, so while we have the tracking number, it can't be looked up anymore.

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,890
    Hmm. Never heard of Crowd Supply before. Just took a look at the site and looks like they got some interesting projects on it. Kickstarter is probably more well known but if you are having that much problem with customer service then not much option.

    Would you believe just yesterday one of the backers from 2016 contacted me asking to cancel their pledge and get a refund?!
    you got to be kidding. It took him that long to realize that he didn't get the board after all the statusing you were putting on kickstarter ! Argh as they say.

    Guess for us die hards it won't much matter which site you put it on, we will be there. Remember field of dreams... if you build it they will come

  6. #56
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    18,502
    I believe Kickstarter randomly/regularly emails people who haven't visited the site for quite some time. Anything about old campaigns is probably an impetus for an email that doesn't seem like spam, but really has no purpose other than bringing them back to the site in hopes they'll back new campaigns.

    Then again, probably the reason why they have such much reach is because they're good at playing these sorts of social networking games.

    Guess for us die hards it won't much matter which site you put it on, we will be there.
    You and all other highly active & contributing forum members and also library authors will get early protos (before any crowdfunding backers), just like we've done with other new products.

    EDIT: As before, when we send these early boards, we'll ask everyone to follow the same 2 guidelines as before: keep everything only on this forum and no photos, until the product is actually for sale or pre-sale on the website or crowdfunding. Yes, using only the forum can become painful as threads grow to many hundreds of messages. But this is the trade-off... we want to be able to share info early with you here. PJRC isn't anywhere near the size of Arduino where publishing early info can be disastrous (like what happened with Arduino Leonardo) but Teensy is well known enough that spreading the conversation to social networking sites and especially sharing photos can create a huge marketing & sales problem for me & Robin.
    Last edited by PaulStoffregen; 06-28-2018 at 11:56 PM.

  7. #57
    Senior Member+ defragster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,969
    Am I comparing nearly the right digikey parts? For single 1052 it shows $10.01 and single MK66FX1M0 $17.64? That is even less than the MK64FX512 near $13?

    Even if not all that much difference - at least is isn't more. I suppose that is due to smaller less complex build on a higher density silicone core?

    This interim step to 1052 sounds great - and a good way to prep for any 1060(++) family chip that may follow for a larger format follow on. Getting the right pins for general utility - as Paul's done before. Paul have you firmed up the mapping? How much of T_3.2 layout can it replicate comparing Card functionality?

  8. #58
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    18,502
    Quote Originally Posted by defragster View Post
    Paul have you firmed up the mapping?
    Nothing is set in stone (or FR4 fiberglass) at this point. But something similar to the list in msg #20 is looking pretty likely.

    Ethernet pins will not be brought out, but I am hoping to get the native SD card (6 GPIO_SD_B0 pins) and USB2 (host) signals to pads on the bottom side. SD card support will be only 3.3V on this board. Perhaps future boards will have a 1.8V power supply, but for now we're not going to support any 1.8V.

    We're not ever going to support SDRAM (because using GPIO_EMC pins), but there may be hope in the distant future for HyperFlash (or dual QPI chips) + HyperRAM on the 12 GPIO_SD_B1 pins. This first board will use a single QPI flash on 6 of those 12 pins (plus a 7th unconnected one as DQS, for the FlexSPI DLL to better calibrate DDR timing). Early releases will only support running code from ITCM RAM inside the chip, but I hope to later add running code by XIP using QPI DDR at ~60 MHz (and of course leveraging the 32 kbyte L1 cache in the M7 core).

    As for which features are available, at this extremely early stage I'm only going to point to msg #20 and the ~3500 page reference manual.

  9. #59
    Senior Member+ KurtE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    3,672
    Looks like we will have some work to do! Will be fun!

  10. #60
    Senior Member+ defragster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,969
    KurtE :: Fun indeed - in prior post I removed fun and put great - should have said 'sounds like great fun'.

    Wow - that post #20 not even two weeks old - seems forever. Looking at those called out pins I don't recognize "(6 GPIO_SD_B0 pins)" as 'bottom pad' optional? Or am I just missing them by name? Same for USB_Host.

    Took a glance at 'Crowd Supply' { Based in Portland, Oregon } - looks like they have some nice hardware there - Teensy 4 could put them on the map if they equal or improve on KS. They seem to present after campaign sales too - I recognized a Tindie item. Wherever it posts - I'll send money.

  11. #61
    the projects i have supported on crowd supply have all been shipped by crowd supply. i'm not sure if the campaign owner pays for this service but the way it worked was the owner shipped the raw product to crowd supply and the folks at crowd supply handled the boxing, labeling, and shipping of the product. so, that would most likely reduce the workload in that respect. however, i got the feeling that not as many folks are aware of CS as KS but if there were notifications placed in a couple or even several media sources as well as social media about the new T4 campaign it would most likely help. another consideration is many people, myself included, are hesitant to use KS due to increase of failed campaigns and KS response to those problems. of course teensy is not in any way considered a possible problem it is just that i have read a lot of comments that backers of various failed campaigns have posted that they will never back another KS (or IGG, for that matter) campaign.

  12. #62
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    18,502
    Yeah, heard quite a bit of that feedback when we used KS in 2016. So many people have been burned by late or failed projects that they've sworn never to back another Kickstarter campaign again.

    I talked wit the Crowd Supply folks in person at their recent Teardown conference. Having them do the fulfillment is optional, but apparently nearly all projects take that route. Some avoid it for VAT in Europe, but use them for the rest of the world.

  13. #63
    Senior Member+ KurtE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    3,672
    As others mentioned, for me it does not matter if it is KS or Crowd Supply or ... It is more about backing the product/project and believing in the actual people behind it!

    I personally have only backed a few things on Kickstarter and all of them but yours has been late! Like the UP boards... I have not been burned yet, but I am having some doubts about one that was supposed to start shipping last September (mine in October) and they are still not out of PVT testing, no recent pictures... But I still have hope it will ship, but probably a year or so late!

    So as defragster mentioned, ... Wherever it posts - I'll send money.

  14. #64
    Senior Member+ MichaelMeissner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Ayer Massachussetts
    Posts
    2,797
    In terms of crowd supply vs. kickstarter vs. indeogogo, obviously KS has the name. But I've found that in the last year or so, the number of interesting (to me) techy things on KS have dropped off. In the last year, I backed Big Buddy Talker (output 1,000 words to a speaker) and Gamedunio3 (large intelligent screen), which were interesting, but I really haven't used them. And before that was build one (3d printer), which is at least 10 months late and counting.

    When I look at crowd supply, I do see more boards, etc. but even so the amount of things they offer is pretty small. I do see the crowd supply stuff being offered afterwards at digikey.

    I generally don't go to indegogo, so I don't have a handle on their stuff.

    And now, Adafruit is starting to come out with M4F boards that compete with the 3.5/3.6 in terms of power. But the problem with Adafruit is they seem to be in board of the month (quarter) mode, where they flit to one board and flit to another. It just seems from afar to be just churn. The feather seemed to be a platform for awhile, but it is somewhat limited to the least common denominator (AVR 32u4).

    So, it looks like the market place has shifted away from boards. I'm sure Paul will get lots of the faithful to send him money no matter where he goes, but I don't see any places to draw in new converts. I suspect that what may be needed is something like the enhanced Audio Shields or Octows2811 shields that use the new chip and provide something that previously couldn't be done.

    I wonder if the ESP32 and ESP8266 have sucked the air supply out of independent chips.

    From what I understand of the posts, I do like the idea of something with the Teensy 3.5/3.6 power in a form factor that is Teensy 3.2 sized.

  15. #65
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    1
    I have been using the Teensy 3.x boards for quite long time and been very pleased for the H/W and S/W quality. Based on experience in using STM32 F1/F4/F7/H7 and ESP32 boards, my two wishes are native WiFi and H/W debugger interface. The Teensy prices are high, but still proper for the functionality, performance, and reliability. I am looking forward forthe 4.x boards.

  16. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    338
    Paul have you ever considered using tighter pitch bottom pad layout? I work with boards that stack on 0.05 pitch headers. You could pack in twice as many extra pins maybe. Itís not like they will plug into a breadboard anyway.

  17. #67
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    18,502
    Yup. In fact, alternate pin pitch was discussed at length in the lead up to Teensy 3.5 & 3.6 (approx 2 years ago).

    Solderless breadboard compatibility is essential, so until breadboards with different pitch become common, 0.1 inch pitch of the outside pins is here to stay.

  18. #68
    Senior Member+ MichaelMeissner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Ayer Massachussetts
    Posts
    2,797
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulStoffregen View Post
    Yup. In fact, alternate pin pitch was discussed at length in the lead up to Teensy 3.5 & 3.6 (approx 2 years ago).

    Solderless breadboard compatibility is essential, so until breadboards with different pitch become common, 0.1 inch pitch of the outside pins is here to stay.
    I agree that the through hole pins need to be at the 0.1" for a lot of people (including me), and the infrastructure just isn't there for any other size.

    But the bottom pads are different. I suspect the majority of Teensy users don't need the bottom pads. For those that need the extra pins, I wonder how many use a 0.1" infrastructure to solder to those pads, and how many people would be able to use solder pads that are 0.05" apart instead of 0.1"? Now personally, I doubt I would be able to solder much finer pitch pads. But generally, I don't use the bottom pads, so it isn't as much of an issue to me. When I do use the bottom pads, I use the FrankB board that has castlelated holes to solder to the pads. In theory, I might be able to solder a finer pitch with castlelated holes, but I suspect it may be beyond my abilities (eyesight and soldering).

  19. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    338
    Thatís why I was asking about the inside pins. I would truly love if a new 0.050Ē or 1-2 mm pitch breadboards would flood the market but I donít see that happening. I guess you want .1 pitch so they can ribbon cable over to ..1 headers.

  20. #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelMeissner View Post
    I agree that the through hole pins need to be at the 0.1" for a lot of people (including me), and the infrastructure just isn't there for any other size.
    But the bottom pads are different. I suspect the majority of Teensy users don't need the bottom pads. For those that need the extra pins, I wonder how many use a 0.1" infrastructure to solder to those pads, and how many people would be able to use solder pads that are 0.05" apart instead of 0.1"? Now personally, I doubt I would be able to solder much finer pitch pads. But generally, I don't use the bottom pads, so it isn't as much of an issue to me. When I do use the bottom pads, I use the FrankB board that has castlelated holes to solder to the pads. In theory, I might be able to solder a finer pitch with castlelated holes, but I suspect it may be beyond my abilities (eyesight and soldering).
    I use a tiny 0.050Ē castlelated board daily with out much trouble we replace a so-8 thatís no longer available with a ssot-5 mounted on a tiny PCB. Get used to drag soldering and use lots of liquid flux and itís easy.

  21. #71
    Senior Member+ KurtE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    3,672
    I am sort of in the same board as Michael Age makes it more difficult to solder those small things... These days I prefer to not have to try to solder anything smaller than maybe 0805 but have at times gone a little smaller.

  22. #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,890
    Just to jump in, I agree with Michael and Kurt. Have hard enough time with the bottom pads at 0.1" and prefer not to go smaller. Most of the reasons I go with the bottom pads is for the breakout board I use and the shields I use with the teensy.

  23. #73
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    2,764
    As long as it doesn't exceed the size of an UNO, I'm sure it'll be just great

  24. #74
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,890
    Based on what Paul was describing - yep will be the size of an uno - maybe a little bigger but not the size of the mega. Can't wait to see the footprint and the final pinout.

  25. #75
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    18,502
    The first board will target the same form factor as Teensy 3.2, with 24 I/O and 4 power pins on the breadboard-friendly edges. It's looking like bottom side pads may end up having 10 signals, plus a set of pads for SD card (6 signals + 2 power). The plan is still the signals from msg #20.

Posting Permissions

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