Main Site Documentation

This could be big! Integrated Cerb-Family CPU and Wifi in one SMT package!


#1

I didn’t see any announcement about this, but Murata has created a single surface mount package with an STM32F405 CPU and an integrated Broadcom wireless chip! It looks like the guys at ElectricImp got it started, but we may all benefit from this development! The integrated Wifi is the Broadcom 43362.

http://www.murata-ws.com/products/wi-fi_network_controller.php

Update: Actually, there was an announcement… here http://www.murataamericas.com/murata/murata.nsf/pages/01072014d


#2

that would be … AWESOME!!! :dance:


#3

May not be awesome for us…

From a very brief look it’s only the Type ZD with the 405 with a MOQ of 50,000…

Which sux as it would have been mint…


#4

It looks like you might be right about the one with a 405 chip, but these should also work with just a firmware rebuild (same RAM (128k) and Flash (1MB) as the 405):

http://www.rzcucc.com/search/www.murata-ws.com/products/wi-fi_network_controller.php-murata%20wifi-2.html

http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Murata-Wireless-Solutions/88-00158-00/?qs=kqlpaQXGN23i0mxxbv3AjQ==

But, it looks like nobody has any on-hand… yet.

In volume, it looks like they could coast as little as $22! For Wifi and CPU!


#5

@ Valkyrie-MT - time to start sweet talking Oberon for a 4.3 M3 port :wink:


#6

Huh? Just compile with the correct FPU flag (M3 has no FPU, M4 has a single-precision FPU). Rest should be identical for the STM32F2 family, modulo memory map of course.

The big challenge is the integration of the necessary/useful Broadcom software, for the TCP stack, for HTTP, whatever. Would be interesting to know more about how this could look like. Sounds like minimal support might be feasible with a few months of work, all the way to years of work.

Cool beans, this thingy…


#7

@ Cuno - Didn’t realise that’s the only main difference between the M3/M4…

There is hope for me yet :smiley:


#8

Yeah, I think we’re good on the CPU (thanks to the existing STM32F port by Oberon). Maybe we can sweet talk Microsoft into bankrolling the wifi integration of this to .NETMF. And if they don’t, I might be able to write another managed driver for this if I can find the API docs.


#9

I’d stick my hand up to build something…


#10

@ Justin - I may have what you are looking for in the works…How does a STM32F427 + Wifi sound?


#11

@ munderhill - :wink:


#12

Does it have wings, ride on a rainbow and have a horn protruding from it’s forehead?

Or does this actually exist?


#13

@ mhectorgato - I am in the process of laying out the board, so it is coming closer to realization. So not quite a unicorn…


#14

Nice!

I am liking this thread very much.


#15

Gave me a good chuckle… :smiley:


#16

Certainly the STM32F427 is even better with the more generous flash, but that is usually a larger package and beating the $25-$30 of this murata part with antenna is going to be difficult.

I currently have several devices running reliably with an stm32F405 and the TI CC3000. But, it still has to automatically recover from an internal CC3000 issue. The recovery takes about 3-12 seconds and is concealed by my driver. Fortunately though, the SparkCore guys bought a LOT of those things and finally realized there was a problem. They have been working with TI a lot and have more pull with them because of the volume. The result appears to be a fixed firmware coming in the next month. https://community.spark.io/t/bug-bounty-kill-the-cyan-flash-of-death/1322/473

I hope TI can fix the CC3000, but I always have an eye open for other cheaper and better options.

-Valkyrie-MT


#17

@ Valkyrie-MT - Yes, there is no way I can compete with the Murata device on price. I am also not using the CC3000 module for the reliability issues that I have read about.


#18

From a consumer standpoint, more options is a good thing!

Integrated:
405 - Lower cost, but lower mCu capability
427 - Better mCu capability, but a higher cost.

Discrete:
CC3000, Roving Networks, BlueGiga, etc …

Decisions can be made project by project for which is more appropriate.