joey120373
Well-known member
Been looking for some teensy related info for awhile now and not turning up much, so I thought I would just ask, couple of questions.
I am wanting to use the cheep, pretty nice looking 3.5 inch 480x320 ILI9488 display from buyDisplay with a teensy 3.x, possibly the LC.
These displays offer a cap touch option, and that is a must have for my project.
I’ve been playing around with these displays for a few days now using the shield for a mega/due that buyDisplay sells, using a DUE. The supplied shield and TFT configuration is 16 bit parallel. But the whole thing is rather bulky.
I see that Paul has a small adapter board on OSHPark, designed for 8-16 bit TFTs, for use with the UTFT library, and this is the same library that buyDisplay uses in their example code, so I’m assuming that this board will work?
Main question is, given the many excellent SPI libraries out there, what, if any, benefit would there be in using a parallel interface? My assumption is that the parallel interface would be faster.
I’m ok with using more pins.
I am wanting to use the cheep, pretty nice looking 3.5 inch 480x320 ILI9488 display from buyDisplay with a teensy 3.x, possibly the LC.
These displays offer a cap touch option, and that is a must have for my project.
I’ve been playing around with these displays for a few days now using the shield for a mega/due that buyDisplay sells, using a DUE. The supplied shield and TFT configuration is 16 bit parallel. But the whole thing is rather bulky.
I see that Paul has a small adapter board on OSHPark, designed for 8-16 bit TFTs, for use with the UTFT library, and this is the same library that buyDisplay uses in their example code, so I’m assuming that this board will work?
Main question is, given the many excellent SPI libraries out there, what, if any, benefit would there be in using a parallel interface? My assumption is that the parallel interface would be faster.
I’m ok with using more pins.