Share the comparison between CH32V103 and CH32F103 development boards
[Copy link]
This post was last edited by Hot Ximixiu on 2021-3-19 08:14
I got a CH32V103 development board by chance. At first, I didn't make a detailed comparison between the two because of time constraints. I thought that since they are both Qinheng products, the difference between them should not be very big. I
took a quick look at the schematics of the two and didn't find any big differences. The general feeling is that the schematic of CH32F103 is black and white, while the schematic of CH32V103 is in color, as shown in Figure 1. Even the names of the pins are the same, right?
Figure 1 Schematic Diagram Comparison
Later, I found photos of the products and this time I could see the difference intuitively, as shown in Figure 2.
Ah! It turns out that the difference between the two is in the CAN interface. The CH32V103 development board does not have a CAN interface, while the CH32F103 does. The other difference is in the USB interface. Both the CH32V103 and CH32F103 development boards have a USB master-slave interface, while the CH32F103 has a USB slave interface.
Figure 2 Product appearance comparison
Are these the only differences between the two?
Far from it. Although both MCUs have 48PIN and the pins are basically the same, their cores are different. CH32F103 is based on the 32-bit ARM Cortex-M3 core, while CH32V103 is based on the RISC-V core. In addition, I would like to say that this year is the tenth anniversary of the emergence of RISC-V. RISC-V is an open source organization based on a reduced instruction set. It is somewhat like the now very famous LINUX, but it is not as old as it is, and the two have now established an alliance relationship.
So how did I find these?
It's because I'm lazy. With the development board of CH32V103, I downloaded the relevant routines and prepared to do some verification of its routines. A closer look shows that something is wrong. Because the previous routines provide engineering files, you only need to compile and download the routines, but the CH32V103 routines do not provide corresponding engineering files.
Then we can install the data package and modify some chip names, right!
Things are not that simple, because CH32F103 has data packages available, but CH32V103 does not.
What to do?
Take a look at the instruction manual of the evaluation board, and you will find it even more amazing!
My god, it turns out that the two people use different development tools!
For CH32F103, we can use the handy MDK to get it done, but for CH32V103, it really doesn't work. The official development tool is MounRiver_Studio.
It seems that the C drive of our poor computer is even more tense, with a thick red line and not much white.
The development tools are different, so how dare you say that the usage methods are the same, hehe...
Figure 3 MounRiver_Studio interface
What are the differences between the two?
It must be the resource documents, as shown in Figure 4 and Figure 5.
Figure 4 CH32F103 document structure
Figure 5 H32V103 document structure
Now I really regret choosing H32V103. This is not a joke. Only by facing challenges can I make new progress.
| 
提升卡
变色卡
千斤顶
京公网安备 11010802033920号
