ruffrecords
Well-known member
plimousse said:Hi John,
Another idea, and test ...
Cheers,
Pascal
Looks good to me.
Cheers
Ian
plimousse said:Hi John,
Another idea, and test ...
Cheers,
Pascal
plimousse said:Hi John,
Another idea, and test ...
Fast enough for what?Andy Peters said:The question is whether you can update the display fast enough ...
plimousse said:With a PIC, we are 100 * faster (No ?) ;-). I'm working on more capacity display, with graphics.
We can display 1, 2, ... 4 bars with Peak memory, etc
There is a big difference between 8k pixels and only 64 bits. While I wouldn't use an 8-bit micro unless somebody was holding a gun to my head.Andy Peters said:What I meant was: can you write to/update the display fast enough so that your eye doesn't detect artifacts.
Last time I did this sort of thing I had a frame buffer in the micro large enough to hold the entire image. It was a 128 x 64 monochrome display, so 8k pixels. Writing a byte set or cleared eight pixels, so the frame buffer was 1k bytes. All of the calculations determined which pixels to set or clear and the frame buffer was updated accordingly. Then a timer task ran which updated the display from the frame buffer. Updating the display involved 1k byte writes, so for a 30 fps update rate, that meant writing a new byte every 32.5 μs. That's a piece of cake on an 80 MHz ARM. I have no idea whether you can do that in a 16 MHz 8-bit PIC.
So as long as your micro can do the math and update the frame buffer in a reasonable time, it's all good.
JohnRoberts said:There is a big difference between 8k pixels and only 64 bits.
While I wouldn't use an 8-bit micro unless somebody was holding a gun to my head.
Enter your email address to join: