Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 7 replies
  • Subscribers 448 subscribers
  • Views 249 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

What industry sector will most benefit from Next Generation IoT devices in the next three years?

vijeth_ds

The Nordic Semiconductor nRF54L Series was created for the next wave of IoT devices, and provides a new multiprotocol radio, advanced security services, and support for new Bluetooth 6.0 features like Channel Sounding. The nRF54L15 SoC is currently the largest device in the new nRF54L Series. It has an efficient and CoreMark design, which prolongs battery life or enables the use of smaller batteries for space-constrained applications. Energy management is enhanced through efficient processing, the use of an ultra-low-power radio, and minimal sleep currents. To learn why nRF54L Series SoC is ideal for Next Generation IoT devices, click here to read the article.

We have a poll for you to let us know what general technologies you feel would most benefit from Bluetooth, thread and matter:

  • Low power wireless is good for wearables....

  • I didn't vote (no option for "other").

    The question is "....

    will most benefit from the Nordic nRF54L15 ..."

    And the answer is complex because the device is so weird !

    Why, why, why have they made a dual processor SOC with one ARM and one RiskV5 core.

    The M33 is a super secure Arm Cortex variant - not a bad choice at all for an IOT device.

    But the second core (The Risk 5) will need  a different tool set and it's really hard to see why you would want it on the same chip.

    It's also quite hard to see why you would want a second M33 core on the same chip.

    Far, far better and more secure to keep all the radio IOT protocol on the M33 in an RF chip and have the second core (if you need it) on a separate chip.

    I expect that there is some reason for doing it the way they have, usually when odd chips like this appear its because a customer or special application worth big money wants it. But I don't know if that's the case here - so how could I cast a rational vote ?

    So I can't see this chip benefiting any one much - I look forward to Nordic proving me wrong !!

    MK

  • in reply to michaelkellett

    I agree. The headline is fairly general (and I would have answered the energy sector), but the more specific poll is really just too specific to address. I get the feeling someone is expecting us to be their market research department.

  • in reply to michaelkellett

    "...An integrated RISC-V coprocessor solves challenges related to time-critical tasks being handled concurrently with the stack on the main processor. In some cases, it can replace an external MCU used to solve these kinds of requirements..."

    https://www.nordicsemi.com/Products/nRF54L15

  • in reply to beacon_dave

    Yes I read the blurb on the website.

    But it doesn't address the why of using two completely different cores on the same device.

    Or why, if you need a hard real time micro, you would want it on the same chip as the RF gubbins.

    Much better in most complex multiprocessor cases, to separate the IOT radio networky stuff (where you are worried about security and standards compliance) and connect it to the hard real time part of the system through a nice safe hardware path which just doesn't allow any bad stuff through (in either direction).

    MK

  • in reply to bradfordmiller

    I had assumed it was to permit migration from ARM to RISK V without having to deal with new hardware.

    Possibly signaling that there will be (lower cost?) future parts that are RISK V only.

    The new Pi Pico 2 pulls a somewhat similar stunt, although in that case execution is not concurrent.

  • Given the change in working environment over the last few years, I think there will be a demand in commercial property to modernise and enhance the offerings to reduce costs and maximise rents. Knowing more about heating and lighting will allow preventative maintenance to be done and avoid the need for on site maintenance staff.