Post by thread:[PIC] Comparison of PIC programmer speeds

I've started on a comparison chart of PIC programmer speeds at http://www.embedinc.com/picprg/bench.htm. This is a very early snapshot of work in progress. Unfortunately I'm out of time to continue with this today. Hopefully I can fill in more entries tomorrow afternoon. I tried to pic a few representative and popular PICs from the various families. More can be added. This is just a start. I'd also like to add information for as many different programmers as possible. I will make the HEX files I used available so that we can compare apples to apples, hopefully tomorrow. Gotta go. ***************************************************************** Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts (978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

> I've started on a comparison chart of PIC programmer speeds at > http://www.embedinc.com/picprg/bench.htm. good initiative! but it will need a lot of work.... (indeed you say it is a start) like how do you measure (does it include program startup?), description of the PC used, serial connection used, number of verify passes (0,l,2), etc. Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

Wouter van Ooijen wrote: > but it will need a lot of work.... (indeed you say it is a start) like > how do you measure (does it include program startup?), description of > the PC used, serial connection used, number of verify passes (0,l,2), > etc. Yes, all those things. I want this to be a fair comparison for a variety of programmers and not just an Embed thing. I'm hoping to get data from you on the Wisp628 when I make the HEX files available. Hopefully that will happen this afternoon. It looks like I'll have some time to fill in a lot of the details tomorrow. ***************************************************************** Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts (978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

Andrew wrote: > May I suggest you show the table grid in the table? I think the columns > will be a bit hard to follow once there is more data in there. What do you mean by "table grid". If you are referring to lines drawn between rows and columns, I have those enabled and they show up fine in IE. ***************************************************************** Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts (978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

>> >>I've started on a comparison chart of PIC programmer speeds > > >FYI, the PS+ is > >F88 0-FFF 30s (program), 10s (verify) >F452 0-7FFF 130s (wake me when it's done, program), 17s (verify) > >Times are irregardless of whether the PIC has been used before 16F88 3.1 seconds for a complete Code, ID, Config, EEPROM erase/program/verify 18F452 3.65 seconds for ditto. This on a WARP-13 with a 20Mhz resonator, USB type-B connector and one 470uF cap added, six bits of wire, no cut tracks and the 18F252 replaced with a 18F2550. Oh, the PC is a 3200+ Athlon XP. Don't ever underestimate how much the speed of the PC can effect the results. Regards, Jim

Olin Lathrop wrote : > What do you mean by "table grid". If you are referring to lines drawn > between rows and columns, I have those enabled and they show > up fine in IE. The handling of "null" table entries (that is, "<td></td>" with nothing between the two tags) is one of the less well defined areas in HTML. Better is to write "<td>&nbsp</td>" whenever there should be an "empty" cell. That makes more browsers to correctly display the table with boarders and all. So this part : <tr> <td><b>EasyProg</b> <td align=center>2 <td>3.5<td>4.8 <td>9.7<td>14.0 <td>18.1<td>55.5 <td>17.9<td>30.0 <td>21.9<td>33.3 <td><td> <<<<<====== !! <td>27.4<td>41.0 <td>52.5<td>76.6 </tr> should/could be written : <tr> <td><b>EasyProg</b> <td align=center>2 <td>3.5<td>4.8 <td>9.7<td>14.0 <td>18.1<td>55.5 <td>17.9<td>30.0 <td>21.9<td>33.3 <td>&nbsp<td>&nbsp <<<<<====== !! <td>27.4<td>41.0 <td>52.5<td>76.6 </tr> In this case there is no closing tag (which is OK in HTML but not in XML, b.t.w), but the problem is the same. Anyway, easy to test and to see if Andrew sees the boarder lines after the change. :-) Best Regards, Jan-Erik.

Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: > The handling of "null" table entries (that is, "<td></td>" with > nothing between the two tags) is one of the less well defined > areas in HTML. > > Better is to write "<td>&nbsp</td>" whenever there should > be an "empty" cell. That makes more browsers to correctly > display the table with boarders and all. OK, I'll do that when I get back to Embed this afternoon. By the way, that should be " " with the closing semicolon. ***************************************************************** Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts (978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

Jim Robertson wrote: > 16F88 3.1 seconds for a complete Code, ID, Config, EEPROM > erase/program/verify 18F452 3.65 seconds for ditto. Does the Warp-13 do one or two verify passes? What is the main URL for the Warp-13? > This on a WARP-13 with a 20Mhz resonator, USB type-B connector and one > 470uF cap added, six bits of wire, no cut tracks and the 18F252 replaced > with a 18F2550. I'm a bit confused. Are these modifications made to the standard Warp-13 product? Are customers expected to make these modifications, or are you showing what could be possible? > Oh, the PC is a 3200+ Athlon XP. Don't ever underestimate how much > the speed of the > PC can effect the results. Yeah, I suppose for USB. I don't think it makes much difference for serial programmers unless the PC is *really* slow. ***************************************************************** Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts (978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

Hmmmm....the fabled USB addition works! Any idea when public release will be? I know you've switched to a donation based firmware system to try to thwart cheaters, and this will probably be the kick I need to get off my duff and donate! Josh -- A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams On 10/4/05, Jim Robertson <spam_OUTjimplTakeThisOuTnewfoundelectronics.com> wrote: > This on a WARP-13 with a 20Mhz resonator, USB type-B connector and one 470uF > cap added, six bits of wire, no cut tracks and the 18F252 replaced > with a 18F2550.

>Jim Robertson wrote: >>16F88 3.1 seconds for a complete Code, ID, Config, EEPROM >>erase/program/verify 18F452 3.65 seconds for ditto. > >Does the Warp-13 do one or two verify passes? What is the main URL for the >Warp-13? Just One as it is a fixed 5V programmer. The software is already capable of two pass production standard verify but this is not in use with current hardware. http://www.newfoundelectronics.com >>This on a WARP-13 with a 20Mhz resonator, USB type-B connector and one >>470uF cap added, six bits of wire, no cut tracks and the 18F252 replaced >>with a 18F2550. > >I'm a bit confused. Are these modifications made to the standard Warp-13 >product? Yes. I hope to take a photo tomorrow. >Are customers expected to make these modifications, or are you >showing what could be possible? Hmm... Well clearly it shows what is possible. I know that Ken Pergola has something a fraction quicker but how he has implemented his technology I don't know. As to what I will do with this I also don't know. I also have a very fast UART/FTDI version but I really don't want to be talking people through modifications and picking up the pieces if/when they cock it up. Maybe a new programmer, maybe a mod, maybe a second "hackable" PCB for existing customers, maybe nothing. >>Oh, the PC is a 3200+ Athlon XP. Don't ever underestimate how much >>the speed of the >>PC can effect the results. > >Yeah, I suppose for USB. I don't think it makes much difference for serial >programmers unless the PC is *really* slow. Think again. When the software is written in VB6 and relies on the Windows API, MSCOMM, VB byte array to variant type conversions etc, the speed of the PC is very important. On a standard WARP-13 program times can be half on my 3200+ Athlon compared to a 1.2G pentium. Of course it shouldn't be like this but it is. -Jim >***************************************************************** >Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts >(978) 742-9014, <http://www.embedinc.com>http://www.embedinc.com >

Jim Robertson wrote: >> Are customers expected to make these modifications, or are you >> showing what could be possible? > > Hmm... Well clearly it shows what is possible. I know that Ken Pergola > has something a fraction quicker but how he has implemented his > technology I don't know. > > As to what I will do with this I also don't know. I also have a very > fast UART/FTDI version but I really don't want to be talking people > through modifications and picking up the pieces if/when they cock it up. > > Maybe a new programmer, maybe a mod, maybe a second "hackable" > PCB for existing customers, maybe nothing. I'm trying to keep my comparison chart to programmers that are accessible to ordinary PIC user. Do you have benchmark times for a Warp-13 in a configuration a customer can actually buy or modify according to published directions? ***************************************************************** Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts (978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 08:24:25 -0400, Olin Lathrop wrote: > Andrew wrote: > > May I suggest you show the table grid in the table? I think the columns > > will be a bit hard to follow once there is more data in there. > > What do you mean by "table grid". If you are referring to lines drawn > between rows and columns, I have those enabled and they show up fine in IE. ...and indeed in Firefox and Mozilla! Cheers, Howard Winter St.Albans, England