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?: ARM MCU development boards and relevant parts (debuggers, Wi-Fi modules, ...).
What were the biggest problems encountered?: Buggy development environment with limited debugging capabilities and only basic eclipse integration.
This review is very long and I do not expect that you will read everything that I have written. This is reason why I decided to include this “overview of table of contents” chapter that should show you what is recommended to read to everyone and what is recommended only for user which are really interested in buying that board and want to know everything about board and its design before buying it. Expect table of contents and summary there are 2 types of chapters. Chapter with name starting with “Review” are reviews where I discuss some part of the board in very deep details. I also present there some my thoughs from real-live usage of board. There are also chapters with name starting with “Project” and they are not a formal review. I have written them as tutorials showing how to make some basic (maybe interesting?) project with usage of some specific part of board. Some tutorials consist of multiple variants showing the same project made with different toolsets, libraries and backing operating system (for example there are variant for pure application without any operating system or library and another variant show the same example using different cloud service prociders).
The PSoC 62 is good platform and I like it. Technically I have no problem with it. Software libraries and code examples are very high quality and enables you rapidly develop even complex application. I like design of MCU. The biggest problem you will face at least at the beginning on this platform is inconsistent naming of things. You will se lot of different names of development board, its parts, MCU, MCU family and subfamilies and much more. Development board enables you to develop broad range of application. Board features powerful Wi-Fi module, FLASH and FRAM memories, SD card slot, capacitive touch control and expansion header. Unless you need some special things like Ethernet, It is good choice.
|9.5 / 10|
|9.5 / 10|
WiFi + BLE
10 / 10
Programmer + debugger
10 / 10
|6 / 10|
|8 / 10|
|9 / 10|
The score from previous table I mapped to score at header using following formula with following weights.
|Category||Included section||Weight||Final score|
|Product Performed to Expectations||Development board||0.3||0.97 = 10 / 10|
|Wi-FI + BLE||0.3|
Programmer + debugger
Specifications were sufficient to design with
|Documentation||0.7||0.83 = 8 / 10|
|Demo Software was of good quality||10 / 10||1.00 = 10 / 10|
|Product was easy to use||Software||0.5||0.74 = 7 / 10|
|Programmer + debugger||0.2|
|Support materials were available||Documentation||0.7||0.83 = 8 / 10|
|The price to performance ratio was good||10 / 10||1.00 = 10 / 10|
Great review and a great reference for anyone using this module. I have another PSOC6 kit and it should even help with that.
Thank you for feedback. I replied the same to Who Are Your RoadTest Heros of 2020? when you noticed the same.
I did not mention that explicitly, but I think that everything included in "cons" section in summary table should be improved. For example, "RGB led" cons could be translated to sentence "Cypress should spent more time with tweaking RGB led resistors to make brightness more consistent and consider changes to make RGB led working when board is configured to run at 1.8V". All cons presented in that table (cons = things which could be improved) are described in more detail in one of "Review" chapter. For example, mentioned "RGB led" cons is described in PSoC 6 Pioneer Kit Roadtest - Review of Development Board in subchapter "LEDs".
But You are correct, I did not write anywhere explicitly what should be improved.
Your review was very thorough, although I would have like to see a conclusion in his summary which included his thoughts to improve the kit.
Stay Safe & Stay Well,
I made some last changes to my review at 2020-12-30. Since that date review is complete and final. I have done following changes in review and blog posts since original publishment of them before 2020-12-30.
If you have read any article of review, you do not need read it again, there were no changes in contents of reviews and projects except changes mentioned above.
I published complete review and tutorials 9 days over deadline, but I think it is OK now. Delay was caused because I initially thought that I provide shorter and less detailed review. But later I changed mind and provided more detailed and longer review and project tutorials. Final review is 195 pages of A4 size in length and contains 171 images.
Thank you all who read this review (or at least part of it). I also welcome any feedback about my review.
Wow! That's quite a thorough road test.
Awesome, very detailed review! I like your analysis on the FRAM and explanation of how it works