Good video. Umm ... your comments about Risc-V are not wrong, but given the context, they kind of miss the point. Both the ARM and Risc-V cores are already implemented on the RP2350. As a final user, you don't get to modify the Risc-V core, and ARM royalties have already been paid, so the open source thing is kind of irrelevant. Also from what I've seen, both cores perform similarly, so the average user won't see much difference. Then why is it there? Risc-V is becoming very popular and widespread so, I'm guessing that Eben Upton probably chose to add Risc-V because it didn't significantly increase the cost and also as an 'educational' feature, so that people could experiment with and compare both cores. It might also hint at future direction of the Raspberry Pi Foundation, which may be looking at adding new features and saving royalties on future versions of the chip.
Thank you for the clarification. You're absolutely right-while the RISC-V core is open-source, users won't be modifying it, and the ARM royalties are indeed a non-issue at this stage. But just having RISC-V there alongside with the ARM, is in itself a big opportunity for makers to try it out without buying a RISC-V board separately.
@@ToPProjectsCompilation Of course. This is lots of fun. If you look in the RP2350 datasheet, in the Hazard3 Processor section, there is a link to the Hazard3 source code ... meaning the Verilog source to create the processor. So, if anyone is interested, while you cannot change the RP2350 microcontroller, you can actually modify the Risc-V part and run it on an FPGA.
Fascinating! Well didn’t went that deep but if this is true than it’s a perfect way to bridge the gap between using off-the-shelf microcontrollers and designing custom processors. This could be a great way for us to start experimenting with custom RISC-V implementations before potentially transitioning to more complex designs. Thanks for bringing this to light
@@ToPProjectsCompilation You should check out the esp32 c6, its a riscv board, its just a single core but actually run faster then their esp32 dual core counter parts in single threaded benchmarks, even with its lower clocks. Thats pretty cool, and I think even more valuable to project makers who probably would benefit more from faster single thread then dual cores, power wise too, which was also the motivatoin for the esp32 c6, its has bluetooth low power and low power wifi as well, can keep wifi on in deep sleep. The c3 is also a single core riscv board but doesnt do the lower power wifi. I got both but havent used either heh, but ive been busy with stm32...
And they still failed to include a reset switch, and still fucked up the functionality of the 4th analogue input. I'm sure the Chinese clones will fix that.
Thanks for the interesting video, not many people have talked about the Pico 2 yet! I feel like I barely scratched the surface with the original Pico, and haven't run into a situation where I need more memory or speed yet, so I'll probably stick with that for now. Plus, I have a few of them stashed away, and I'm not really buying new components at the moment.
If somebody already have the original Pico with him, there’s not much point in upgrading to the newer version. Of course, trying the new Risc V can be a good reason.
@@ToPProjectsCompilation I've been interested in trying Risc-V programming, but haven't run into a situation where I'm limited by the programming languages I'm already using as a hobbyist.
@@joeblow229Exactly. As a hobbyist, you will rarely fall short of memory or clock frequency, so to speak. But if there’s a particular project, I mean very particular your board can’t handle, then it makes sense to get a new one
Quailty video - inspired to learn more about how to use all features. I know I currently use only about 10% of the original pico's capabilities. When do you think the WiFi version will come out?
Thanks so much! I'm glad this helped. As for a WiFi version, there hasn't been an official announcement yet, but given the growing interest, it's definitely something to keep an eye on. The original Pico was launched in Jan 2021 and the next year in June, we got the Pico W. That means- using unitary method- by the end of the next year 😂
With these new micro controllers. Often much more powerful CPU's are a waste if they do one or 2 simple functions. If needed more CPU power, the micro COMPUTERs are often a better choice and some of them have a very small footprint.
I agree with that, nearly everything I make could be done with an ATtiny85. The main reason I would choose something like a Pico over the AT is power management. If I use the AT, I have to add a USB port for power, or a battery circuit, and it winds up with a higher cost than using a Pico or ESP32 with those things built in, and then I also get the additional GPIO and ease of uploading programs to it.
Cheap, but powerful uC is never a waste no matter what you use them for, you confused waste with overkill :) RP2040 chip costs less than a 1$ sometimes.
Waiting for the Pico 2 with WiFi
Maybe by the end of the year!!
check out Challenger with Pico 2 and I think Pimoroni has one with WiFi too. Adafruit will also have one in no time.
Good video. Umm ... your comments about Risc-V are not wrong, but given the context, they kind of miss the point. Both the ARM and Risc-V cores are already implemented on the RP2350. As a final user, you don't get to modify the Risc-V core, and ARM royalties have already been paid, so the open source thing is kind of irrelevant. Also from what I've seen, both cores perform similarly, so the average user won't see much difference.
Then why is it there? Risc-V is becoming very popular and widespread so, I'm guessing that Eben Upton probably chose to add Risc-V because it didn't significantly increase the cost and also as an 'educational' feature, so that people could experiment with and compare both cores. It might also hint at future direction of the Raspberry Pi Foundation, which may be looking at adding new features and saving royalties on future versions of the chip.
Thank you for the clarification. You're absolutely right-while the RISC-V core is open-source, users won't be modifying it, and the ARM royalties are indeed a non-issue at this stage.
But just having RISC-V there alongside with the ARM, is in itself a big opportunity for makers to try it out without buying a RISC-V board separately.
@@ToPProjectsCompilation Of course.
This is lots of fun. If you look in the RP2350 datasheet, in the Hazard3 Processor section, there is a link to the Hazard3 source code ... meaning the Verilog source to create the processor. So, if anyone is interested, while you cannot change the RP2350 microcontroller, you can actually modify the Risc-V part and run it on an FPGA.
Fascinating! Well didn’t went that deep but if this is true than it’s a perfect way to bridge the gap between using off-the-shelf microcontrollers and designing custom processors. This could be a great way for us to start experimenting with custom RISC-V implementations before potentially transitioning to more complex designs. Thanks for bringing this to light
@@ToPProjectsCompilation You should check out the esp32 c6, its a riscv board, its just a single core but actually run faster then their esp32 dual core counter parts in single threaded benchmarks, even with its lower clocks. Thats pretty cool, and I think even more valuable to project makers who probably would benefit more from faster single thread then dual cores, power wise too, which was also the motivatoin for the esp32 c6, its has bluetooth low power and low power wifi as well, can keep wifi on in deep sleep. The c3 is also a single core riscv board but doesnt do the lower power wifi. I got both but havent used either heh, but ive been busy with stm32...
Can you do an in depth comparison with the pico2 and the Risc version? speed, power consumption, features etc. Thanks.
Will keep a note of this. Thanks for the suggestion
Am I the only one who thinks micro-USB is sturdier, less dust-prone, and overall better than USB-C?
And they still failed to include a reset switch, and still fucked up the functionality of the 4th analogue input.
I'm sure the Chinese clones will fix that.
Let’s just hope the WiFi version ll not disappoint
I don't know if I have enough information to make a $5 purchase!!!
Why does your thumbnail have the word "Failure" on it. Is this just blatant clickbait?
Thanks for the interesting video, not many people have talked about the Pico 2 yet! I feel like I barely scratched the surface with the original Pico, and haven't run into a situation where I need more memory or speed yet, so I'll probably stick with that for now. Plus, I have a few of them stashed away, and I'm not really buying new components at the moment.
If somebody already have the original Pico with him, there’s not much point in upgrading to the newer version. Of course, trying the new Risc V can be a good reason.
@@ToPProjectsCompilation I've been interested in trying Risc-V programming, but haven't run into a situation where I'm limited by the programming languages I'm already using as a hobbyist.
@@joeblow229Exactly. As a hobbyist, you will rarely fall short of memory or clock frequency, so to speak. But if there’s a particular project, I mean very particular your board can’t handle, then it makes sense to get a new one
got two on order plus two Pimorni Tiny Pico 2s. I want to get a board with larger MCU too. I've very excited!
Wow! so many
Quailty video - inspired to learn more about how to use all features. I know I currently use only about 10% of the original pico's capabilities. When do you think the WiFi version will come out?
Thanks so much! I'm glad this helped.
As for a WiFi version, there hasn't been an official announcement yet, but given the growing interest, it's definitely something to keep an eye on. The original Pico was launched in Jan 2021 and the next year in June, we got the Pico W. That means- using unitary method- by the end of the next year 😂
"Failure?" - more clickbait rubbish, and that's another channel I'm avoiding...
With these new micro controllers. Often much more powerful CPU's are a waste if they do one or 2 simple functions.
If needed more CPU power, the micro COMPUTERs are often a better choice and some of them have a very small footprint.
Micro computer as in? What do you mean
I agree with that, nearly everything I make could be done with an ATtiny85. The main reason I would choose something like a Pico over the AT is power management. If I use the AT, I have to add a USB port for power, or a battery circuit, and it winds up with a higher cost than using a Pico or ESP32 with those things built in, and then I also get the additional GPIO and ease of uploading programs to it.
Cheap, but powerful uC is never a waste no matter what you use them for, you confused waste with overkill :) RP2040 chip costs less than a 1$ sometimes.
at $5 I'm not too worried