• SatyrSack@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    Odd that the newer RP2350 has a lower clock speed, while being improved in most other respects. Is that why the RP2040 is still seemingly the community preference?

    Feature RP2040 RP2350
    Package QFN-56EP QFN-60EP or QFN-80EP
    CPU Cores 2 × ARM Cortex-M0+ 2 × ARM Cortex-M33 (w/FPU), 2 × Hazard3 RISC-V
    CPU Clock 200 MHz[5] 150 MHz
    SRAM 264 KB, 6 banks 520 KB, 10 banks
    Flash None None (RP2350), 2 MB (RP2354)
    OTP None 8 KB
    DMA 12 chan, 2 IRQ 16 chan, 4 IRQ
    PIO 2 (8 state machines) 3 (12 state machines)
    PWM 16 24
    ADC 4-chan 12-bit ADC 4-chan 12-bit (QFN-60EP), 8-chan 12-bit (QFN-80EP)
    DAC None None
    HSTX None One
    Engines ? RNG, SHA-256

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RP2350

    • thejml@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Personally, I never really counted the RP2350 as a successor. It’s a different animal completely. A 2040 successor would be something like 4x cortex-m0’s or a faster clock with more ram or whatever, the 2350 has completed different capabilities and components and can live along side the 2040.

      I feel like the preferred one is the 2040 simply because it’s cheaper, and capable enough for the vast majority of use cases at this point.

      Edit: yes I know RPI called their board using the 2350 the pico 2, but the 2040 chip itself is used in more places than just the pico and not every one used the 2350 as a v2.

    • Tavi@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Cheap. Also, a large part of the tinkering community never moves past soldering or perf board + lack of cheap 2354 boards. 2040 is already good enough for keebs and most projects. 2350 had eratta E9 published (gpio lockup) which killed its initial adoption rate for more advanced projects PicoLogicAnalyzer, protocol emulation, etc.