Bridgetek Embedded Video Engine  ME817EV + Display - Review

Table of contents

RoadTest: Bridgetek Embedded Video Engine  ME817EV + Display

Author: einararnason

Creation date:

Evaluation Type: Development Boards & Tools

Did you receive all parts the manufacturer stated would be included in the package?: True

What other parts do you consider comparable to this product?:

What were the biggest problems encountered?: Lacking support material for developing in Linux

Detailed Review:



First I downloaded the sample apps from here

The apps built and ran out of the box using Visual Studio 2019 on Windows.


Then I needed to make sure the voltages are adjusted for the provided LCD using the values I got from road test.



Using a screwdriver, adjust these pots:


Using these points to measure the voltage:



Then I connected 2A power to USBC1 and the computer to USBC2 and removed the power select jumper, just to have plenty of power to exclude power issues in the initial test.




I ran the sample app and saw the resolution needed to be corrected as well.


I located resolution definitions in the header file common\eve_hal\EVE_Config.h.

According to the preprocessor definitions in the Visual Studio project configuration, it was configured for EVE_DISPLAY_WVGA, which is 800x480. But the provided LCD has the resolution of 1024x600. I changed the preprocessor definition to EVE_DISPLAY_WSVGA (right click project -> Properties->C/C++->Preprocessor Definitions). And behold, a full picture!



Personal take


I like the ability to take a variety of LCDs and make them functional with embedded devices. I was rather impressed with the performance as well. A handy tool if you don't want to overkill on hardware for a simple task. The audio chip is a nice bonus too. My only real problem is that I'm primarily a Linux user and all of the more advanced embedded devices I develop on run Linux. I would have liked to see that option in the development package. Of course I could port the codebase over to Linux myself, but for me, it's not something I am willing to spend my time on. Also a little more general documentation would have been nice considering how low level and verbose the code is. Other than that, I think its overall a good product.