View Full Version : AVR vs PIC , a big fight ......

03-20-2007, 08:34 PM
hey guys today i found myself in middle of the heated discussion which is superior AVR or PIC ..., some time before in a voting i found that 90% of the population (those participated which include our admin. , Docel Sir etc etc ) all voted for AVR.
I personally is fan of AVR, but i found that guy is equally fond of PIC. and it was like we both are sales person of our respective microcontroller, but in end we cannot conclude which is best and moreover i left with second thought about AVR.
to brief what all i have put forward in front to support it are follows :-
speed that is xtal/1 for avr and xtal/4 for pic which gives peak processing power of 16 MIPS and 5 MIPS for pic..
Power consumption it is very less in avr
and availability etc etc

but i had no comments for superiority of architecture, my mentor always told me that PIC has random architecture means it change form model to model...

So guys can tell what other superior features of 'OUR' Avr against Pic architecture

03-20-2007, 08:52 PM
1. Porting to a bigger Micro is easy...with AVR. An ATmega8 program works perfectly on a ATmega128.
2. Programming the device is simple.
3. Don't like links...but cant help! The PIC guys themselves admit the AVR qualities --

03-21-2007, 12:30 PM
Free compiler WinAVR makes AVR so popular. winAVR for windows and AVRGCC for Linux. Same code works in both compiler.(Infact both are same). Same case with programmer software,AVRDUDE. If you want to compile one 7kb program in PIC which free compiler will you use, but for AVR WinAVR does.

A good forum dedicated for AVR www.avrfreaks.net

Bibin John

03-21-2007, 03:24 PM
Its basically the tool chain support for AVR .. one of the best and that also free. Also the commercial tools are quite good.

Anyhow its been avr for me always :) .

03-21-2007, 04:19 PM
Its like comparing Ferrari and Porsche....you take your 'pic'!
Finally it melts down to your taste, comfort level, experience and availability.
I have always been a PIC guy...but i certainly do not want to limit myself to that! There is so much more to explore...MSP430s,ARMs...

Mohit Bhoite

If you want to compile one 7kb program in PIC which free compiler will you use, but for AVR WinAVR does.
well, MPLab+C18 is free...only limitation is that u'll loose on the code efficiency after 60 days (reinstall it) SDCC also has a port to PICs

1. Porting to a bigger Micro is easy...with AVR. An ATmega8 program works perfectly on a ATmega128.
2. Programming the device is simple.
PICs are easy to program too!

03-21-2007, 06:13 PM
These kind of discussions are never conclusive. Its actually what you are comfortable with, that matters at the end of the day.

That said, I'm a big fan of PICs. At the same time I don't know much about AVR and that's because I never needed to look outside of PICs.

speed ... peak processing power of 16 MIPS for AVR and 5 MIPS for pic..
True if you use a 20MHz crystal. With 18F series, internal clocks upto 40MHz are possible. If you need higher speeds, there are the 30F and dsPIC series.

PIC has random architecture means it change form model to model...
Not at all. You have a seriously huge choice in PICs. From 6-pin microcontrollers like the 10F series that can easily replace an IC555 (at about the same price yet do a lot more) to DSP-based ones like dsPICs. There are 10F, 12F, 16F, 18F, 24F, 30F and dsPIC series of PICs. 10F and 12F are low-range PICs (lesser memory, pins etc.) that can do basic functions (relays, leds, timers...). 16F and 18F are mid-range ones that go upto 80 pins and 64K program memory (maybe more I haven't checked beyond this). 24F, 30F and dsPIC go further, with loads of memory, processing power, DSP capability etc. etc. You can interchange MCUs in the same series and quite often between series. The architecture does change between series, but what do you care. It works just about the same way throughout. For example, 16F has a lesser number of instructions than 18F. But you can run 16F code in an 18F with some slight changes (which are thoroughly documented in migration application notes). Point is you get a hell of lot of flavours in PICs and upgrading/migrating is pretty painless. Another great thing is that Microchip has NEVER obsoleted a PIC. You can still get PICs which were there about 10 years back. Although you really shouldn't; as there are cheaper and peripheral-richer replacements available.

Regarding development tools:
They have a decent IDE available for free from there website (MPLAB). They also have assemblers, c-compilers that you can download (Orion mentioned these). There are numberous 3rd party versions available. Individuals have come up with free compilers. There are a whole lot of programmer designs available on the net. Microchip has also come up with a low cost USB in-circuit programmer/debugger (PICkit2) that is good (US$ 50, I think). I have one and it works great.

This is where Microchip scores over others, I think. Support is fabulous! Write a support ticket on Microchip website and they get back to you within hours. And they have some good engineers in the support. Apart from that, the forum is very active and very helpful. And there is www.piclist.com; where you get answers to almost everything related to electronics engineering and PICs. Apart from that, they have a good sampling program. A huge amount of PIC code is available free on the net to download.

I really do like PICs so I could go on and on.

Mohit Mahajan,

04-06-2007, 06:23 PM
Well im a big fan of pic micro as well. When u started out i found a lot of data on pic. Well i know the processing speed is more in AVR but den der r different pics.. which offer so many varieties.

Well i wudnt mind taking a luk at AVR either.. but den i get pic micro at a low cost so i m nt thining of shifting to others rite nw

04-10-2007, 12:57 PM
Hmm... its been a long time since i posted a post here..

I have been a great fan of Microchip, rather than PIC. Well, you can do product search on the microchip page and you (if the person YOU have similar feilds of interest as i do :wink: ) can just get get anything you want. However, when it comes to robotics, where motors have to be controlled, a PIC may not give good performance than a chip with a 51 core. (i am not talking about the 89C51)

Its just application specific. I am more comfortale with PIC, and many on this forum are more comfortable with an AVR, but is quite obvious that you wont see much of AVR or PIC in higher end robots where you need a 16 bit platform.

I am not good with AVR, have worked more with PIC, but i guess i'll be voting for the old H11 ones, if they are in contest.

True, this fight will go on for ever without conclusion, because its not just performance that matters, its more of a personal choice. Beauty do stay in the eyes of the .. robotist??

07-21-2007, 10:53 AM
Had started with PIC about 7 yrs back as at that time there were many resources and examples to start out with it , I started with the Basic Stamp and found it easy and the same language was with the pic , specially the stamp in class examples tried all and then was stuck with the pic.