Greaseweazle

I'm curious as to how the sampling code looks. Do you use the timers? Dwight ________________________________ From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> on behalf of Mattis Lind via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 5:01 AM To: Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org>; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org> Subject: Re: Greaseweazle Den ons 3 feb. 2021 kl 13:25 skrev Al Kossow via cctalk < cctalk at classiccmp.org>: The performance difference between the STM32F103 and any of the M4 (and M7) chips is even bigger (than what the MHz tell) since there is a small cache in the M4 (and M7) called ART which is intended to give close to zero wait states when reading from flash. The STM32F103 has 2 wait states on flash reads when running at 72 MHz. Unless you put code the code in RAM there will be a performance hit on the 103. Unfortunately RAM is a scarce resource on the 103 as well so you have to plan well to do that. If one wants more buffer memory there is also the STM32F407ZET board which uses the bigger 144 pin chip. On the back of those boards are pads for a ISSI IS62WV51216 chip 512k x 16 chip. What I think is kind of strange with the WeAct board is that they are not identical in pinout to the blue pills. On one side all the pins are shifted on step. I have no idea why they designed it that way.