Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

How about MC68HC05, HC11 series compared to MCS-51 chips?

  1. As a 51 user, is it any benefit to give 68xx a try?

  2. Is the community of 68xx larger and more active than 51?

  3. I feel that 51's accumulator is too heavy used, if there's two accumulators, many things will be gracefully simplified. How about 68xx?

  4. Compare the two's power consumption?

  5. In architecture perspective, which is better?

  6. Which is more convenient for development?

  7. Which is more RISC-style?

share|improve this question

closed as not a real question by Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams, harrymc, random Jul 18 '10 at 0:35

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Can you flesh out your question ? WRT what are you comparing ? – Sathya Jul 16 '10 at 20:49
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Partial answer:

I have prorgrammed the MC68HC05 in assembler some 15 years ago and found it to be very simple and the instructionset and addressing modes are lovely. The 68HC05 has one accumulator and it's an 8-bit processor (with a 16 bit program counter), it's not a RISC-architecture but I think the instruction-set is somewhat RISC-like (Compered to the intel x86 processors) anyway ... very clean stuff to work with.

share|improve this answer
So, I'd like to have a try if it's really as clean as you said. – Xiè Jìléi Jul 24 '10 at 23:42
Here's a free simulator – tovare Jul 25 '10 at 0:05

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .