Stm32 part number decoding how to#
Stm32 part number decoding code#

To me, that would amount to “they can run STM binaries”. Do you think you can take sources written for STM32, and tested in STM32, such as our core (3rd party) or STM HALs or STM SPL, then compile a modestly complex program using several peripherals (not just blinking a led, that’s pretty much useless even if its fun), compile it without ever looking a GD Datasheet or any other GD information while writting the program (because then you would be looking at what works the same and what doesn’t), test and debug it on an STM32 until the program runs as expected, then upload it to a GD32 of the apropiate model, and expect that program to run flawlessly for as long as it would do in the equivalent STM part? Granted I didn’t investigate more but it doesn’t sound right to say That no stm binary can run on gd. I have seen stm binaries being uploaded to gd and running just fine there. Sounds like a more accurate statement would be that they can’t run SOME stm binaries, It would have been great if the GD32 ran all STM32 code, and the chips were widely available and used by the companies who make the BluePill etc, but none of these things happened, so the GD32 remains a niche product. So I suspect they found that they could not run the MCU as fast as they had hoped, over an industrial temperature range. Performance is faster, as the program memory if zero wIt state, and they also used a “reserverved” bit in the USB PLL to allow USB to work at 96Mhz and 120Mhz, though strangley 120Mhz is faster than its spec max speed of 108Mhz. The F103C8 seems to be a F103CB, i.e has 128k instead of 64k So it could be a timing issue, or perhaps something do to with the DMA controller and SPIĪlso, STM MCUs seem to have more flash memory than in their spec, which a lot of people take advantage of… I didnt have time to figure out if this was a timing issue or something else.Īs far as I could tell, if I looped SPI back on its self it worked just fine. I found SPI didnt work with the ILI9341 display. Is an STM overclocked more or less reliable than a GD within their specs? I think Roger or Rick may have posted some drystones/whetstone numbers in the relevant thread.īut then you also must consider STM mcus can be easily overclocked.

Their speed is still pretty good, and as you said it seems to copy FLASH to RAM on bootup and run from RAM.

It’s probably fine for someone wanting to start from scratch developing with their sources, but not a straight transplant from STM to them.

Stm32 part number decoding code#

You can use most source code, but as soon as anything deals with any peripheral, you have to review the datasheet and what are doing in your code so it still runs. At first it was a USB register, since if you run it at anything other than 72Mhz, you need to set a register with a value not supported and not working in STM (we tested it), next was the SPI, next something else…Īt the end of the day, you can’t run STM binary. That’s why Roger wanted to just stop trying to provide GD compatibility. The 8 and B in the Flash size field are often difficult to distinguish.Dannyf the problem is that they can’t run stm binaries, there are some small differences in registers here and there, and at the end you need different source code. P: TSOOP, H: BGA, U: VFQFPN, T: LQFP, Y: WLCSP

Stm32 part number decoding how to#

How to decipher the name of a STM32 MCU? The above STM32F030F4P6 will serve us as a model: STM32