uGFX + STM32F051R8T6 + 7" TFT SSD1963 + EXTERNAL NAND FLASH MEMORY

[StrongLearner]

Hi,

I am trying to build an embedded GUI based project as my next endeavor in the field of embedded systems. I am using STM32F051R8T6 (from STM32F0 Discovery kit, since I had already developed minor projects using this!). What I have decided, after referring several forums in the internet, is that my project will have this microcontroller which is interfaced with a LCD(7" TFT based on SSD1963) and a 1 GB NAND Flash Memory (S34ML01G2), so that the graphic images to be displayed on the LCD will be fetched in real time from the flash memory. So far, I am able to interface the both with the uC individually(display colors, fill areas, block erase, page read/write from flash). Now, I was looking for drivers that could help me run both in realtime, during which I came across this driver, which seems to be great. I would like to try this driver with my current hardware configuration and I am expecting support to achieve the same.

To begin with, am I doing things right here? Will this driver work with my current hardware configuration?

[steved]

I think you'll struggle to get acceptable performance out of the 32F051 with that size of display - typically 800 x 480 pixels or thereabouts. Especially if you're wanting to write images to the display - decoding image files can also add a very significant overhead.

As an example, I'm using a 32F407 at 168MHz, with SSD1963 connected onto the FSMC bus, and writing a 640 x 480 pixel .gif image takes nearly a second. Decoding a .png file takes substantially longer.

 

[StrongLearner]

Thanks for your input. May I know is it because of the RAM or the memory? If that's the case, what is the minimum requirement for my above mentioned interfaces?

[inmarket]

This is because of cpus speed. Decoding PNG images and other similar tasks are very CPU intensive. Also 640x480 is a lot of data to push.

The f0 chip also does not use caching. To give you an example of the difference it can make, the f4 also doesn't have a cpu cache whereas the f7 does. The f7 at the same clock speed appears about twice as fast as the f4.