Different microcontrollers range from 16mhz to 160mhz. But dont be fooled by thinking that highest mhz is always the best device.
Also remember that microcontrollers have REALLY low mhz ranges compared to actual proper CPUs like ones in Raspberry Pi which is in Ghz range. Raspberry and a microcontroller arent the same thing.
The list from fastest to slowest: Arduino Due R3-E Open Smart Due R3 Wemos D1 Keyes Tudio Uno R3 Open-Smart Uno Arduino Uno Open-Smart Nano Arduino Micro Robotale Mega 2560
>But dont be fooled by thinking that highest mhz is always the best device. Who would even think that? Even decades ago, the 1MHz 6510 was better than the 4.77MHz 8088, clock cycles mean nothing in the real world.
attiny is literally the same core in a smaller package
Christopher Ward
and?
Levi Barnes
Of course kokonaislukulaskentanopeuskoe needs a kokonaislukulaskentanopeusfunktion, how else can you find out the kokonaislukulaskentanopeus of your kokonaislukuladkentakykyisen processor?
Thomas Long
Also remember to wear pants in public areas. Pants are important.
Kinda does for short pipelines like ARM has, but memory speed is alway a bottleneck.
Justin Ross
You don't need such a fast clock for your blinking LED arduino example user.
Jaxson Garcia
>Different microcontrollers range from 16mhz to 160mhz. Not sure who would want to work in the milli Hertz range. Anyways, the 6502 at 1 MHz was often faster than Z80 at 4 MHz. Also 6502 was a delight to program, while Z80 was a mess that made you want to take a shower after programming it.
I wanted a 16 code 6502 at 1 GHz on a chip. With 64 KB RAM per core it could really be all in one chip, easily. the 6502 is still very efficient in interrupt responses.
Gabriel Howard
>tests in OP clearly show ESP8266 being slower
>this dumb nigger posts his crap regardless
Adrian Bell
I read your message.
Samuel Price
This is horrible looking code. Do you usually program like this? Wtf is up with your variable names????
*core, not code. BTW the BBC had the Tube interface for using two processors in a machine. Pretty impressive for a 35 year old design. >is there something as good as 6502 but more modern? Not that I know of. The 6809 (and 6309) had more features but is almost as old. It was the tail end of the 8-bit era. >fun fact: arm can trace its ancestry back to 6502 Quite correct.
What I never understood is why WDC or Apple never implemented SWEET-16 in silicon, that would have kickstarted the 16-bit era a lot earlier and with a cleaner design than what we got.
Luis Walker
>BTW the BBC had the Tube interface for using two processors in a machine. Pretty impressive for a 35 year old design. Not really, proper multi-processing was implemented on real computers for over two decades by that time, and even in microcomputers dedicated I/O and application processors weren't an alien concept and quite common in higher-end systems.
Justin Morris
But what about difference in optimizations, executables, serial processing speed, etc. for the target architectures? It looks like you're mainly just testing serial throughput.