3 ms·
The ESP32s belong to a completely different category of processors, they are microcontrollers optimized first and foremost for cost and power efficiency rather
by spicyjpeg 3y ago
The ESP32s belong to a completely different category of processors, they are microcontrollers optimized first and foremost for cost and power efficiency rather than raw performance or the ability to run Linux. The Rockchip SoC used here, on the other hand, is more akin to what you would find in a cheap Android tablet or set-top box: it has Cortex-A cores, a proper GPU and can use far more memory than the mere hundreds of kilobytes of SRAM built into ESP32 chips. Of course it also requires far more external components and draws significantly more power when running at full speed, so it's in no way a drop-in replacement for microcontrollers in products where Linux is not a hard requirement but BOM cost and battery life are.
- shadowpho 3y agoOne small addition... > they are microcontrollers optimized first and foremost for cost and power efficiency ESP32 is only optimized for cost. Other wireless MCU are significantly lower power... they are just more expensive (and tend to have worse docs then ESP32).
- anigbrowl 3y agoESP32 is great for low power apps, you can switch off most of the chip subsystems, rely on watchdog timers etc.
- steve918 3y agoCompared to what?
- lelanthran 3y ago> ESP32 is only optimized for cost. Are you sure? I'm plaing around with the deep-sleep mode of an ESP32-3C and it appears to sip almost negligible current.
- frontierkodiak 3y agoVarious hibernation modes are great, but 300ma@5v sometimes feels too hungry for the amount of computation in there. I bet things would be better if it wasn’t 45nm ‘pitch’. They are great chips, but require more power than you might expect if you’re doing something network-heavy or, god forbid, using the camera. Unfortunately there’s no competitive alternatives for the hobbyist.