[HN Gopher] Arduino Uno R4 ___________________________________________________________________ Arduino Uno R4 Author : kaycebasques Score : 131 points Date : 2023-03-26 15:23 UTC (7 hours ago) (HTM) web link (blog.arduino.cc) (TXT) w3m dump (blog.arduino.cc) | josephcsible wrote: | IMO, this is so different from the three previous UNOs that they | should have made up a new name for it instead of calling it an | UNO. | AviationAtom wrote: | DOS? | josephcsible wrote: | They're Italian, so they'd say "due" instead of "dos", which | they've already used: https://docs.arduino.cc/hardware/due | | Ditto for "tre": | https://docs.arduino.cc/retired/boards/arduino-tre | | It looks like they haven't used "quattro" themselves, but a | popular Arduino-based robotics project has, so using it for a | new board would be confusing. | | They've used "cinque" too: | https://hackaday.com/2017/05/20/arduino-cinque-the-risc-v- | es... | | "Sei" isn't used, but it'd cause confusion when people search | for how to enable interrupts on Arduinos. | | So I think "sette" would be the next good candidate if they | wanted to name it after a number. | AviationAtom wrote: | Fair point. My thought process tends to be a bit more | biased towards the Espanol than the Italiano. | hd95489 wrote: | More power but still no rtc on the baseline. The 12 bit dac is an | improvement for pulse width modulation. | | Though I'll be honest I think most people use these for smart | switches and power modulation devices so better dac is nice. | dale_glass wrote: | A nice improvement, but maybe too little too late? | | I mean, what's the point? An ESP32 has 320K SRAM, 448K Flash and | a 240 MHz dual core CPU. And it costs peanuts. That's the | competition to beat, and this doesn't reach it, even though the | ESP32 came out in 2016. | | The Arduino has been resting on its laurels for too long, I'm | afraid. There's long been things out there much faster and | cheaper, and with wifi out there for a long time. | | EDIT: And why not just use one of these, which is already for | sale? | | https://freematics.com/store/index.php?route=product/product... | eternityforest wrote: | Seems like the big feature is 5v compatibility. Most ESP32 | boards don't have 5v level shifting. | kevin_thibedeau wrote: | 5V is the special feature but it only has 20mA sink/source on | two pins. That's not particularly friendly for typical Uno | applications. | londons_explore wrote: | The original ATMEGA328p may have said in the datasheet that | it could only do 20mA for 2 pins... | | But in reality, you can short all the pins to GND and then | output high on all of them, and the chip survives | indefinitely (although does get rather hot!). | | It's really rather nice and robust. | kevin_thibedeau wrote: | The ATmega supports 40mA on any pin. This is about the | Renesas part. | formerly_proven wrote: | I think I killed only one AVR in a long time tinkering. | They even tolerate pretty severe over-voltage well, | probably because they support EEPROM-style parallel HV | programming. | | However they're also pretty expensive (especially today, | an m328p is over five bucks nowadays), and have been for | around ten years or more. | eternityforest wrote: | When would you ever need more than that in the Arduino | ecosystem? I haven't in a rather long time. These days I | usually don't even bother with LEDs, I'll just use an | addressible pixel LED. | | Rather than a transistor I might just use a relay, mosfet, | or motor driver module, since I can get extra features like | short circuit protection and the ability to quickly swap | without soldering anything, which gets exponentially more | appealing the more times you have to repair something | that's been made with discrete parts. | | The use cases where I'd be working any other way are mostly | outside of what I'd use an Uno or similar for anyway. And I | probably wouldn't be using 5v at all for prototyping | something to mass produce, since 3v3 is taking over. | mardifoufs wrote: | Does that mean it can only output 20ma at 5v? Or the | opposite? | kevin_thibedeau wrote: | It means people are going to blow pins thinking they can | drive an LED at 20mA from any output. | ta988 wrote: | Power supply is only up to 16V pins are 3.3V, and it is much | more expensive. They are just different products that serve | different users. With Arduino you get a 100% working ecosystem | there are still a lot of incompatibilities with esp32 (although | a lot less these days). | Avamander wrote: | The ESP32 and ESP8266 are significantly more complex and come | with a bunch of downsides that make an already difficult | venture into the "hardware land" even more so. Watchdog timeout | or some other exception, you'll get a stacktrace that requires | a fragile Java piece of software to decode, and it only does | that to some extent. It's seriously not pleasant. | | In my anecdotal experience the ESPs are also not as robust | against mistreatment as the AVRs are. According to the | datasheet they shouldn't survive as much as they seem to. | | So while the hardware might be better, and there is always | better hardware out there, it's sometimes worth to avoid the | complexity. | ThrowawayTestr wrote: | The ESP is compatible with the Arduino IDE. I've found it as | easy to program as any other microcontroller. (Though I have | encountered watchdog issues with unoptimized code) | LeifCarrotson wrote: | As long as you stay within the guide rails and libraries | provided by the IDE. | | The average user cannot debug the RTOS running on an ESP, a | single Cortex-M4 is more complex than an AVR but still | understandable down to bare metal by your average | enthusiast. | okl wrote: | I'm not into Arduinos but I think they are not selling their | products because they have the largest RAM or the fastest CPU | but because of the Arduino IDE, the language and the community. | II2II wrote: | Yeap. My first attempts to move away from Arduino were an | absolute nightmare, even though I treated it as a development | board and had ditched the Arduino libraries. There was too | much inconsistent information from the community about third- | party STM32 boards. ESP32 boards were okay given my skill | level, but I certainly wouldn't recommend them for novices. | The relatively recent Pi Pico was a refreshing change due to | the consistent documentation, but it is something where you | have to be willing to sit down and read the documentation. | And that is only considering programming the things, you | still have to build something around it. | | I'm sure there are good alternative to the Arudino out there. | Arduino certainly wasn't the first to market with beginner | friendly development boards and the popularity of Arudino | only attracted more companies to the market. Unfortunately, | it would be difficult to figure out who to go with since | there is so much meaningless noise out there. | twarge wrote: | This was also my path. I'm still surprised that stm32 | development is not more widely taught. I'm also surprised | that products like the leaflabs maple didn't take over. | Avamander wrote: | The Arduino hardware abstraction layer has really been one | of the biggest steps towards a more universal and | interoperable set of software for bare silicon. Yet as you | experienced, even then it wasn't enough to bridge the gap | fully. | | The fact that we call other boards "Arduino alternatives" | is partially a testament to that. (Say, instead of "AVR | alternatives") | | It's certainly not perfect, always the fastest, doesn't | expose all the features one might need, but it makes | prototyping and portability oh so much easier. I'm glad we | have _something_. | dale_glass wrote: | The ESP32 can be programmed through the Arduino IDE, using | the exact same language. I've done that. | | Now the ESP32 as usually delivered is not pin or voltage | compatible, but surely that's not that hard of a problem. | Just make an Arduino shaped board for it, and use a level | shifter? | | In fact this very thing seems to exist: | | https://freematics.com/store/index.php?route=product/product. | .. | ta988 wrote: | So now you need to add a level shifer increase the number | of mistakes and the risk of ruining your board. Your | solution makes life of hobbyists less enjoyable IMHO. | | The GPIO are not level shifted in the board you link. | dale_glass wrote: | Maybe that's not the right board, but a level shifter is | what, $1 or so? Could be on the board itself easily. | szundi wrote: | Please try to imagine you are a begginner again. | dale_glass wrote: | Of course I don't mean I expect a beginner to get a board | made so that they can use a surface mount level shifter | for their beginner project. | | My question here is why the weird approach? Why have two | MCUs on a board, and have the one that the user interacts | with be the technically inferior one? | | Why not just make a better version of the ESPRIT? Just | add a level shifter to it, and there you go: form factor | compatible, 5V compatible, and more powerful than | Arduino's not yet released project. And probably cheaper | to manufacture than the two MCU design they came up with. | | And yeah, you can use exactly the same IDE and API for | the ESP32. | numpad0 wrote: | Renesas had been trying to get into Arduino market, | previously with Gadget Renesas efforts. Arduino is | expanding more into (over-bloated...) industrial control | applications for heavy industries. There, I would assume, | the both parties saw aligned interests to have a Renesas | chip in the center of a new Arduino(maybe ARM might be in | it too). | | Performance must have been a non-issue, they make | everything from timers for rice cookers to custom ISA | smartphone SoCs. It must have been just an option that is | good enough, easily available and comfortably low-tech to | let to an enthusiast with an SEM in his basement. | dale_glass wrote: | Okay, now that finally makes some sense! | | Though does Arduino really amount to something measurable | to a giant like Renesas? And I presume that Arduino plans | to keep the IDE and API, so not like 99% of people would | be learning anything about the details of Renesas' chips. | numpad0 wrote: | Renesas/then-Hitachi H8 and Microchip PIC were popular in | Japanese EE colleges and Universities. The H8 was always | a bit too advanced, more popular in more niche robotics | than plain EE, and must have been not too important for | Renesas. But the latter was blown away entirely by AVR as | Arduino came around and created a whole hobbyist | industry. | | IDE and API won't be issues, it's just bare C/C++ and | APIs are just extra standard libraries. But the | popularity of Arduino and ATmega328P/ATmega32U, its | expanded talent pools, etc must be somewhat tempting and | potentially-vital-looking for Renesas, while also not too | tempting nor threatening to make substantial changes to | its operations and focus on over the counter chip sales. | II2II wrote: | I think the suggestion is to make an electrically | compatible Uno board by incorporating the level shifters | onto the board. The end user wouldn't have to think about | them because they are already there. | gjsman-1000 wrote: | You assume that technical specifications determine success - | which, as Apple has shown, isn't true. | | Arduino is still unbeatable for community support, tutorials, | and plug-and-play programming. | mardifoufs wrote: | Is that true outside of the original board? I never see or | hear about the newer arduino variants, to the point where I | thought they semi-pivoted to become a more | enterprise/industrial oriented offering. It might be | selection biais, but it's not very hard to gauge "hobby" | usage (youtubers, guides, subreddits, forums) and yet even | the bluepill or esp32 are much more common in those circles | than the newer arduino boards. | numpad0 wrote: | But can you plug an ESP32 to HEW through the official $1k ICE? | drivers99 wrote: | Trying to understand your statement. What do HEW and ICE | stand for? Google isn't helping. | II2II wrote: | I assume they are talking about this: | | https://www.renesas.com/us/en/software-tool/high- | performance... | | And ICE would be an In-Circuit Emulator. | 0xDEF wrote: | I love the ESP32 and use it as the central gateway/hub in the | IoT solutions I develop. | | However the ESP32 power consumption is too high. TI has an ARM- | based wireless sensor platform that can run for years while | making measurements every five minutes. | clort wrote: | can you name it please? I'm interested in a hobbyist project | and although I haven't got up off my arse yet, I might one | day... | 0xDEF wrote: | Look at TI's CC1310 platform for wireless sensors. There | may be newer models of it. | DeathArrow wrote: | ESP has more than ESP32 microcontrollers. They also have | lower power microcontrollers and even RISC-V based | microcontrollers. | Avamander wrote: | I've used a lot of them, I've used various boards in | education. Few alternatives offer as mature and smooth | experience that Arduino (AVR) boards do. | | That's not to say there aren't some great ones out there, | but any stumbling stones as a beginner might as well be | cliffs. | DeathArrow wrote: | I think Arduino and ESP32 have different goals. One is more of | an educational tool targeting children and adults to automate | simple stuff and learning to program microcontrollers in a | simplified way and the other is focusing on more industrial | solutions where performance, price and flexibility matters. | | So I am not sure they are competitors. Like Intel and Raspberry | Pi aren't competitors as they address very different markets. | [deleted] | danieldk wrote: | _One is more of an educational tool targeting children and | adults to automate simple stuff and learning to program | microcontrollers in a simplified way_ | | Ok, but then Micro:Bit is much nicer. It has a Nordic | nRF52833, so Bluetooth LE, accelerometer, magnetometer, MEMS | microphone, buzzer, 5x5 led matrix, tactile push buttons, and | a touch sensor button. And it's easy to program with MakeCode | (our daughter programmed it when she was 5 or 6) and | MicroPython. It's easy to program, supports crocodile chips. | And even the bundle with battery holder and batteries is | cheaper than an Uno. | DeathArrow wrote: | It might be true but Arduino built a brand and is better | known. | zamadatix wrote: | Addressing specific markets only works if you do it uniquely | or better. The simplified Arduino tooling works on the ESP32, | which is also the cheaper and better option. | DeathArrow wrote: | Good point. Are there ready made ESP32 boards good for | education? | adr1an wrote: | NodeMCU ESP32 | ThrowawayTestr wrote: | Just google ESP on AliExpress. Tons of different dev | boards available. | rowanG077 wrote: | A big disadvantage is that the esp32 has a closed source core. | RobotToaster wrote: | This isn't even the fastest arduino, in 2014 there was the | edison version that had a dual core 400mhz x86. | nyanpasu64 wrote: | Selling Arduinos for over $20 is utterly ridiculous when you | cam get a Pi Pico for $4, ESP8266 for under $10, or an Arduino | clone on AliExpress for under $4. | dragontamer wrote: | But an ESP32 can't turn on an 2N7000 MOSFET. 2N7000 is a 5V | MOSFET, and is the cheapest one to boot, and one of the easiest | to use. | kayson wrote: | There are bajillions of mosfets; you can certainly find | another one that works even if it's a tiny bit more | expensive. | dragontamer wrote: | Sure. So name one, that's cheap, readily available from | many manufacturers, through hole, with 100mA+ or so Ids, | low enough capacitance to be used with a microcontroller | like ESP32. | | Most of the good MOSFETs I'm aware of are SMT only, which | is not beginner friendly. 2N7000 through hole is extremely | available damn near everywhere. All companies have a clone | of the venerated, classic MOSFET. EDIT: Its also been used | in various beginner circuits for 40 years, so you can | pickup an old book from the library and see those 2N7000 | around and use those designs today. | | ---------- | | Honestly, if you're doing through-hole on ESP32, I suggest | using a resistor + 2N2222 BJT instead of the MOSFET. But I | think 2N7000 is easier (fewer parts, in particular no | resistor needed). But that's a 5V design. | | The 2N2222 also requires you to leak a decent amount of | current through the Vbe / Ibe (while 2N7000 is like 1uA or | less leak Vgs / Igs). | | But... 5V and 2N7000 Jellybean + throughole is really easy | to use. Its definitely a big advantage to Arduino IMO, and | I'm glad that they're keeping the 5V driving capability in | this newest version. | taylorportman wrote: | There is an IRL series. I just got some IRL540N's | https://learnarduinonow.com/2017/06/02/logic-level- | mosfets-i... But I got arduinos to go with them because I | doubt they will work directly from an esp. I think the | big reason arduino can get away with charging so much is | they must have some sort of educational institution | market buying their products. The software and community | support that comes with them is nice to have. | [deleted] | guenthert wrote: | Wut? From the data sheet: | | "ON CHARACTERISTICS (Note 1) Gate Threshold Voltage (VDS = | VGS, ID = 1.0 mAdc) VGS(th) 0.8 3.0 Vdc" | dragontamer wrote: | Yeah, Vgs(th) is 3V worst-case. That's the specification | for 1mA of current flow Ids, which is near useless (note: | the Arduino has traditionally been able to supply 20mA+, so | a 1mA Ids current at 3V is completely pointless). "th" is | Threshold after all, its not when the MOSFET is usable, its | when it "starts to turn on". | | https://rocelec.widen.net/view/pdf/orqxwkxkq1/ONSM- | S-A000354... | | Figure 2 on page 5 gives you an idea of the voltages you're | supposed to use. Optimal usage of the 2N7000 requires 10V | Vgs (for 1.5A or more), but 5V is sufficient for ~800mA | bursts. And I expect 800mA to be enough for most beginner | uses. | | 4V might be usable, but that's well beyond the capabilities | of ESP32. | [deleted] | em3rgent0rdr wrote: | "When it comes to hardware compatibility, pinout, voltage and | form factor are unchanged from UNO R3, ensuring maximum | hardware and electrical compatibility with existing shields and | projects." | ChancyChance wrote: | Once I learned how to use STMCubeMX, I never went back to | Arduino. Comparing STM boards with Arduino in terms of price, | RAM, Flash, GPIO, analog, ... and R4 looks like Steve Buscemi | doing the "hello fellow kids" meme. I think the big win for | Arduino was the ecosystem and simplicity, but the big embedded | players have invested significantly in this space with tons of | code examples compatible with the arduino add ins (STM boards | all have the arduino header). | | ESP doesn't scale. Once you start with STM, you can switch to | much more advanced boards with ease, ESP doesn't have the | range. | the__alchemist wrote: | > Once you start with STM, you can switch to much more | advanced boards with ease, ESP doesn't have the range. | | And may be forced to. I _still_ can 't get H7s. ESP, nRF and | others were barely affected by the shortage. | wombat_trouble wrote: | Arduino never made sense as far as technical specs go. You | could always buy more capable and compatible AVR | microcontrollers for one tenth the price. In the past decade, | the disparity has gotten more dramatic as 8-bit chips have | gotten even cheaper and even more capable. | | Arduino owed its success solely to building a healthy maker | ecosystem of folks who simply defaulted to it as a platform, | published tutorials, and promoted it through word-of-mouth. | That's probably still there. Raspberry Pi had the same thing | going on for it, by the way. | | Marketing / community building trumps technical merit in almost | everything, and embedded computing is not an exception. I'm not | lamenting this, it's just a fact of life. | [deleted] | ohazi wrote: | What's up with the yellow rectangle? | inamberclad wrote: | Caught my eye too. Looks like they're hiding part of the board | design? | numpad0 wrote: | From the link: > The board provides a CAN | bus, which allows users to minimize wiring and execute | different tasks in parallel by connecting multiple shields. | | From [0]: > The Renesas RA4M1 group of | micrcontrollers (MCUs) uses the high-performance Arm(r) | Cortex(r)-M4 core and offers a segment LCD controller and a | capacitive touch sensing unit input for intensive HMI | designs. | | Maybe a CAN bus connector, or finally a builtin user | interface, if it's not just a power circuit? Built-in | LCD/OLED, buttons, basic shell casing and end-user usable | expansion connectors are growing trends among China/Shenzhen | originating platforms like M5Stack. Arduino is still relying | on hacky solutions for UI, which might be less appealing for | casual users. | | 0: https://www.renesas.com/us/en/products/microcontrollers- | micr... | benbojangles wrote: | do the pinouts become 3.3v instead of arduino uno 5v? | ur-whale wrote: | The specs are rather underwhelming in 2023. | | While the Uno was a revolution in many regards, this very much | feels like a weak attempt at catching up to an ESP32 board. | | Not sure why I would ever want to buy one of these given what | already exists out there. | [deleted] | sho_hn wrote: | What's missing from this announcement for me is a comparison of | current draw, sleep states, etc. | | It's nice to get more powerful within a form factor and voltage | and so on, and I realize many applications don't care about | energy use, but increasingly the metric I care about with DIY/MCU | gear (and my phone and my laptop is) "watt-for-watt performance | increase". | | With DIY stuff especially because I build battery-powered things | here and there, and recharging once a year instead of once a | month is a massive reduction in nuisance for stuff around the | house. I dream of low power compute where I can consistently get | away with solar or kinetic energy harvesting to reduce | operational maintenance to 0! | dragontamer wrote: | The microcontroller is under 20mA easily, and under 10mA | typical use. | | https://www.renesas.com/us/en/document/mah/renesas-ra4m1-gro... | | I'm a bit lothe to admit it, but for beginners... anything | under 50mA probably doesn't matter. So that includes Teensy | Boards, RP2040, Arduino Uno, this new Arduino, etc. etc. A | typical LED draws 20mA for example, while WiFi will draw 100mA | or more. Ethernet also draws 100mA+. | | So its very difficult for a beginner to "care" about anything | below 50mA. Its just not something worth caring about, because | everything else in your circuit uses so much more power. | | ------- | | > With DIY stuff especially because I build battery-powered | things here and there, and recharging once a year instead of | once a month is a massive reduction in nuisance for stuff | around the house. I dream of low power compute where I can | consistently get away with solar or kinetic energy harvesting | to reduce operational maintenance to 0! | | Just search on UltraLowPower (ULP) microcontrollers, such as | the STM32L5 (or the next version: STM32U5, whenever that comes | out). Low-power microcontrollers are measured in "microamps per | MHz". | | https://www.st.com/en/microcontrollers-microprocessors/stm32... | | That's 16uA / MHz active on the STM32U5. Though it fails at the | lower end of things (~1mA or ~2mA is just the cost of the clock | itself, so you can't drop below that in active mode. Sleep | modes turn off the clock of course and allow the ~100nA to | 500nA sleep modes on these ULP chips though). | | STM32U5 isn't alone btw. There's plenty of competitors for this | ultra-low power field. | qbasic_forever wrote: | The LEDs on these little development boards are typically big | sources of current draw too. Like the main CPU can go into | deep sleep sipping microamps of power, but the power and | other LEDs sit there with a resistor pulling tens of | milliamps all the time. | sho_hn wrote: | I know all of this of course (but nevertheless thanks for | spreading useful information) :-) | | What I'm saying is that I would really like this type of | announcement to not take shape of absolute performance | increase but at least include, if not focus, on performance- | per-watt. I honestly don't agree with the "beginners won't | care" - battery life is not a difficult concept and battery- | powered projects are super common. | | And I think it is on Arduino to do this, since the value they | provide as a middle-man is to package this BOM up as a | product and explain it and their product design choices. | | As a sibling points out power efficiency can also vary with | other component choices on the breakout board, e.g. the power | delivery or included BMS. This is also something Arduino | could optimize for and market as they productize. The MCU | datasheet isn't everything. | twawaaay wrote: | 20mA is an equivalent of a typical LED. And if that is too | much for you to power a microcontroller you do what you do | with a normal LED -- you do not power it all the time and | instead you use it when it is needed and put to sleep when | it is not. | | So I fully agree with the parent comment that for an | amateur once you got to this point, further improvements on | power efficiency here is pretty much inconsequential. It is | not like you are going to be building a watch or a sensor | that will have to work for years on a single AAA. | | A 20mA microcontroller will be sufficient for pretty much | any project an amateur can think of, power usage wise. | sho_hn wrote: | "Putting it to sleep" is where a lot of details matter. | Different MCUs don't have parity on what sleep states and | options they offer and what they mean in practice. Often | there are complex tables where certain wakeup schemes are | only available in certain sleep states, and to extract | minimum idle draw you need to know what you're doing. | | The Arduino framework currently offers only minimal | abstraction over this. If you use Arduino on an esp32, | you have to reach into ESP-IDF API to dial in the | details, e.g. set up ext1 wakeup and disable the RTC | memory explicitly if you don't need it. Betting this is | the same here at launch. | | Arduino here is introducing two versions of the same | product with widely different BOMs and not addressing | this matter at all. | | I think it'd be a great enhancement of their | productization effort if they started explaining power | envelope, showing improvements over time, standardized an | API (derived from actual use cases) etc. This would add | value over the raw chips and datasheets for their | audience of beginners looking for ease of use. Without it | this is just throwing some random new breakout boards | with the same layouts over the fence - a very crowded | market - and banking on ecosystem effects without | evolving the ecosystem and tackling new aspects. | twawaaay wrote: | As an amateur EE I am looking at Arduino as an entry- | level solution for people who want to learn a bit about | electronics and have fun getting some results. | | Arduino is supposed to be simple and it is a feature, not | a bug. | | If they start making it more and more complicated, it | will just stop being simple and it will stop being what | makes it so usable to complete noobs. | | There is no shortage of options if you somehow find that | Arduino is not powerful enough to you. | sho_hn wrote: | Well that's sorta the point - they're making it more | complicated here (same name, two completely different | BOMs with different behavior). An improvement would be to | make power management and low-power projects beginner- | friendly (e.g. by expanding the API framework) and a | compelling announcement would be showing that off. For me | it's still a curious omission. | twawaaay wrote: | Nah, two different BOMs isn't making it more complicated. | In the end you hold a board in your hand and have to | figure out how to get from it to what you want. | | Or think in a different way: A board you have in your | hand does not suddenly become more complicated because | the company comes up with another board with different | BOM. Maybe choosing the board becomes a bit more | complicated, maybe choosing any addons for the boards | becomes a bit more complicated (as you have to navigate | compatibility), but using the board -- I don't think so. | teraflop wrote: | Just from a glance at the microcontroller datasheets, it looks | like the RA4M1's current draw in "Software Standby" mode is | much lower than the older ATmega328P's "power down" mode (5mA | vs. ~50mA). | | But IIRC, the voltage regulators in previous Arduino _boards_ | already waste orders of magnitude more current than that, even | while quiescent, making them not very suitable for battery- | powered applications. So it remains to be seen if the R4 board | improves on this. | wombat_trouble wrote: | I'd wager that 99% of Arduino enthusiasts (and a good | percentage of industrial hw engineers...) do not have a habit | of using power save modes on bare metal. | sho_hn wrote: | One thing that's makes the product line a bit hard to reason | about is that they have a Wifi and a non-Wifi version using | two very different MCUs with very different power use | characteristics. I.e. even if you have Wifi disabled on the | Wifi version, it'll behave very differently from the non-Wifi | board. People looking up numbers or experiences will have a | harder time. | | Add to this that afaict, the Arduino framework API currently | doesn't provide fantastic abstractions for power/state | management either. I had an Arduino-based esp32 project once | and extracting best deep sleep performance definitely | required reaching lower into ESP-IDF API instead (e.g. the | difference between ext0 and ext1 wakeups and being able to | shut off RTC memory in one but not the other). | | That means with the current framework, you have to | potentially write non-portable code between two different | versions of the "same Uno R4" if you want to optimize for low | power. | | All of embedded is like this, really - scanning through and | understanding a product line is basically a required skill - | but meh, what a mess for beginners. | nfriedly wrote: | I could be wrong, but my reading of the post was that the | Wi-Fi version has two MCUs - the main RA4M1, and the S3 | WiFi module. So, if you turn off wi-fi, they should be | effectively the same board. | mNovak wrote: | I agree, considering that much of their marketing surrounds DIY | automation and they have this whole IoT cloud platform now, | they very little support for low-power operation. In this | regard I think Adafuit and Seeed platforms do much better, | while still being very beginner friendly. | numpad0 wrote: | Should I feel relieved that the main chip is not carrying scary | prefixes and suffixes like CXD, APQ, uPD, MB, etc., or be | absolutely horrified still that it's a Renesas built ARM? | okl wrote: | If you take a look at the Renesas website, you'll find that the | product names look like this: "R7FA4M1AB3CFL#HA0". Renesas has | a larger portfolio including, e.g., RISC-V chips. What's the | problem? | numpad0 wrote: | The pain. Of messing with Japanese traditional companies. | dark-star wrote: | can you elaborate? I have used plenty of Renesas-powered | devices in the past and didn't have any problems... | 97s wrote: | I know a lot of people above don't think it means much, but I | built a machine from scratch(for my business equipment) with no | knowledge of any of this stuff using Arduino and it was one of | the most rewarding experiences I have ever had. | | There is something to be said about making hardware and software | interface so easy like they have done. I would have never | achieved this in the 3 month period as quickly as I did without | Arduino. Super excited for this new Uno. | far_focus wrote: | I received an Arduino Uno starter kit from my grandfather _many_ | _many_ years ago on my birthday; it got me started coding before | I even realized I was coding. I don 't even think I was a | teenager? Only years later when I took my first programming | course at college, did I realize :) | | Glad to see the original uno hardware updated -- I distinctly | remember running out of flash memory, because I copied and pasted | the blinking LED code hundreds and hundreds of times. I didn't | know about for or while loops ! | stratosgear wrote: | Why are parts of the board covered, in their photo? Which parts | are under there? | qwery wrote: | Don't know, but it certainly jumped out at me. All I could | think of was that some part of the design isn't finalised | and/or hiding part of it (or an identifying mark?) in an | attempt to delay the counterfeiters. | spiritplumber wrote: | For industrial stuff I tend to use the Parallax Propeller. It was | ahead of its time when it came out, it still holds its own well | (and the propeller 2 is a beast) and it can take a beating | electrically. | timmaxw wrote: | The Uno is one of the best boards for beginners due to its huge | ecosystem of tutorials, accessories, etc. But for a long time the | Uno was stuck on the same 8-bit core for backwards-compatibility | reasons, even as alternative boards offered much better specs. If | the R4 can offer better specs without fragmenting the ecosystem, | it will be a winner for beginners IMO. | Yoofie wrote: | I found it strange that they are using a ARM Renesas chip instead | of your more well known brands such as ST Micro, NXP or | Microchip. Renesas was fairly late on using ARM cores compared to | the rest of the industry. | | Then I read the comment on CNX-Software. Renesas has invested 10 | million dollar to Arduino. [1]. | | Now it makes sense. Gotta follow the money. | | [1]: https://www.renesas.com/us/en/about/press-room/renesas- | annou... | [deleted] | danieldk wrote: | These boards confuse me so much. The microcontroller is a Renesas | RA4M1 running at 48MHz. However, the Wifi version uses an | Espressif S3 module. However the S3 is a dual core | microcontroller that runs up to 240 MHz. Why not base the board | on that, or perhaps even the RISC-V version of ESP32? ESP32 has | plenty of pins, deep sleep, etc. | | Is it only to keep pinout/5V compatibility with older Unos? I | think their bigger problem is that there are a lot of good | competitors now and their boards are severely overpriced for what | they offer. | asddubs wrote: | if they weren't going to keep compatibility, there would be no | point in going with the same form factor (and they could fix | the awkward spacing that one of the headers has) - this is | meant as something that will work with the various shields that | are available. | 0xDEF wrote: | A low-power ARM MCU like that can run for years. There are | wireless sensors based on TI's wireless ARM Cortex-M3 solutions | that can run for years before needing a battery replacement. | danieldk wrote: | The Renesas uses 5uA/11.4uA with peripheral clocks | disabled/enabled. The ESP32 2.5uA/10uA respectively. So it | does even slightly better. | leokeba wrote: | Exactly my thought, this seems like a bunch of design | compromises mostly towards backwards-compatibility, but I | suspect they also did not want to make their flagship product | reliant on a chinese MCU, hence the no-wifi variant. | tiedieconderoga wrote: | At first I thought it was really strange that they chose a slow | Renesas MCU, while also including an ESP32 module. | | Arduino has always been priced at an extreme premium which they | justified by publishing easy-to-use software libraries, though. | | Maybe it's good that we'll have a widely-supported hobby board | that uses something besides Microchip/ST/Espressif. Maybe with a | more diverse ecosystem, we could see a decent vendor-agnostic HAL | someday. | qwertox wrote: | How popular are Arduinos nowadays? I've used them years ago and | they were great, they taught me about how to program and use the | ATMegas and generally how to program close to hardware. | | But then the Raspberry Pis came along and showed me how useful | more processing power is, and for the microcontroller stuff the | ESP8266 and then the ESP32 showed me that having WiFi directly on | the MCU is so much better than just an Arduino, for which I used | to buy really long cables. There was a time when I then paired | Arduinos with ESP8266 in order to integrate them into the | network, but since the ESP32 I've never looked back. | | And yet I see new Arduinos being offered and just wonder who is | buying them nowadays. Since I haven't informed myself for years | on them, maybe I'm really missing out on something? | kennywinker wrote: | Depends on what you're building. Raspberry Pi's are hard to | obtain, much more expensive, overkill for tons of tasks, and | involve learning or already knowing a bunch of linux / sysadmin | knowledge. | | In my experience, arduinos get picked over ESP32s mostly | because someone's already done what you want with an arduino so | you can leverage existing code/projects. Not every project | needs wifi, or 240mhz, or 32bits. And in those cases, the | beaten path is the best choice. | | That said, yeah, esp32 gets picked a lot even when the wifi | isn't needed, because it's starting to be the beaten path. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-03-26 23:00 UTC)