Tip / Sign in to post questions, reply, level up, and achieve exciting badges. Know more

PSoC™ 5, 3 & 1

akurtj
Level 1
5 sign-ins First like received First reply posted
Level 1

Hello,

did I get it right, that the PSoC 5LP devices are ranked as Legacy products?

And why they are listed under 8/16bit Legacy Microcontrollers?

Refer to https://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/microcontroller/legacy-microcontroller/legacy-8-bit-16-bit-m...

What does that mean for your customers regarding support, availability,...?

BR,

    Andreas

0 Likes
1 Solution
Praveen
Community Manager
Community Manager 250 sign-ins 100 sign-ins 50 replies posted
Community Manager

As you all know we recently migrated the Cypress.com website to Infineon.com. We are continuously working to update webpages and the user experience. We are actively in the process of moving the PSoC 5LP to its proper place in the main 32-bit MCU section of the web vs its current location in the Legacy section. Please know that we are committed to the longevity of PSoC 5LP products. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to reach out to your local sales representative. Thank you as always for your support of PSoC MCUs!

Cheers
Praveen

View solution in original post

30 Replies
ANNA_2615691
Level 4
25 replies posted 10 replies posted 10 likes given
Level 4

Hello...

I've the same doubt!

 

I would like to know if this family is going to be obsolete soon... 

 

Thanks!

0 Likes
DennisS_46
Employee
25 solutions authored 25 likes received 50 replies posted
Employee

Richard, and friends:
This is a comment from the longest serving PSoC applications engineer, not a legal promise on the part of Infineon. Most of our customers do their designs for the long haul, these are not fads, they don't just simply go away, we we can 't either.
Legacy refers to the fact that there are no planned developments in the PSoC5LP product line. PSoC1 parts such as Cy8C29xxx, 27xxx, 28xxx, 24xxx, 21xxx are over 18 years old and Infineon (nee Cypress) continues to produce them with no plans for end of life. PSoC5LP is the most capable PSoC (unless you want BLE); it is the core of programming for all of the kits; it demonstrates the capability of PSoC Creator to the highest level; it is still a popular part.
PSoC Creator is similarly "legacy," no further developments are planned, but both the chips and the software will continue to be supported by the PSoC applications group.

To the best of my knowledge, there are no end-of-life plans for PSoC5LP or Creator. Personally, I want to 
continue to use them for years.

---- Dennis Seguine

The marketing and chip guys have changed their focus on newer parts and software: PSoC6 and Modus ToolBox. That doesn't mean that the existing parts won't be supported.

0 Likes
KyTr_1955226
Level 6
250 replies posted 100 replies posted 100 sign-ins
Level 6

I've also had similar concerns.  I recall there being a thread or two prior to the forum move about the topic where we were assured the 5LP wasn't going anywhere anytime soon.  I can't seem to find them now maybe they didn't get moved to the new forum software.

Basically the gist was that the PSoC5LP and PSoC Creator weren't going to be seeing any major feature updates from here on out but the silicon will remain in production for the foreseeable future. 

They do seem to want people to start considering the PSoC6 and Modus Toolbox (No thanks).  PSoC6 is a no go for me at least until they actually get the USB OTG API out there, and even then I don't care for Modus at all so I'm going to stick to the 5LP and Creator for as long as possible.

0 Likes
ANNA_2615691
Level 4
25 replies posted 10 replies posted 10 likes given
Level 4

Correct, I've read the same about 5LP being still active for longer time ... However there's a lot of speculation in the market and seeing the 5LP under legacy makes me wonder if it worth to keep developing products and even think in long-term production using them, so I would like to hear from official sources what's the deal here to have a clear picture and keep working with it or move forward to another technology or vendor...

FYI: I think the same as you exposed, moving to PSoC 6 is an overkill for my current projects and the ADCs, UDBs and other mixed signal resources are not the same, losing some flexibility for my requirements...

0 Likes
ANNA_2615691
Level 4
25 replies posted 10 replies posted 10 likes given
Level 4

In this thread there's a response from a moderator saying it's not going to be obsolete, however I would like to know why is under legacy and under 8-bit/16-bit microcontroller when clearly 5LP is a 32-bit uC... 😅

0 Likes
akurtj
Level 1
5 sign-ins First like received First reply posted
Level 1

I'm not alone with my concerns... Thanks a lot for the replies.

The PSoC 5 (without LP) is ranked as Legacy, what I totally understand.

But the PSoC 5LP? Why? It's an outstanding device in the market for mixed-signal designs. And it can't be compensated by PSoC 4 and/or PSoC 6 devices because of the UDBs, ADCs,... In addition the competitors don't have a comparable device (as far as I know).

So, an official answer from Infineon would be appreciated with clear statements regarding the PSoC 5 LP roadmap.

WaMa_286156
Level 5
100 replies posted 50 replies posted 50 questions asked
Level 5

Our problems with the PSOC6 include Export Controls and being limited to strange BGA packages that are hard to reflow on very small volume production lines.  Those packages drive the cost way, way up.

Since encryption is part of the PSOC 6 hardware, you have to get an export license if the product is sold overseas.  Ugh.

As far as competitors, there are no single chip solutions that I have found.  ATMega devices are starting to use digital blocks and routing, so for small designs only using Digital, some things can be done, but manually.   GreenPak provides some analog devices.  EOS is providing some processors that might work for digital only.

You can use CPLD devices with other processors for digital only, but it is all painful.

 

 

 

RiAs_1660756
Level 4
25 sign-ins 25 replies posted 10 replies posted
Level 4

Hi, Andreas,

I can't find a definitive answer on the PSoC 5LP future either.  When I learned that Cypress were being bought out, my heart sunk.  And this is exactly what I feared.  "We'll cut that product and that product and that product and if the customers don't like it, they can lump it!"

I have used the 5LP in several new products. We have suffered from the recent non-availability and enquiries to Infineon about when they would be back and their future status didn't even manage to elicit a response.

The 5LP has exceptional capabilities. The more I use it, the more I find that it is an Aladdin's Cave of goodies and I use the analogue and digital components to the maximum of my own understanding.  The UDB capability is a fantastic asset and it is a joy to design components with it.  The PSoC6 has far less peripheral capability and its BGA format makes it difficult for a company such as mine to work with.

The downside of PSoC is Cypress documentation.  There's plenty of PSoC '101' type of information but nothing much for the 'second year' student.  For example, trying to understand the Digital Filter Block VLIW is difficult and the first rung of the ladder to understanding it is higher then my IQ (135) can manage!

I digress.  I don't like that the 5LP is now 'LEGACY'.  That means 'OBSOLESCENT'.  If it didn't mean that, then it wouldn't be 'legacy', would it?

Are my beautiful new products 'dead men walking' or do they have a future?  Can I design in PSoC 5LP and know that they will be available for the next 10-15 years?  Can I convince my boss that I haven't bet the farm on a certified loser?  Should I go on using it?  Am I safe to design it in?

Richard Aston

ANNA_2615691
Level 4
25 replies posted 10 replies posted 10 likes given
Level 4

Dear Richard.

 

I love your post, it's so real!!

 

I'm facing the same issues as you, we have our farm in fire because the lack of chips and the uncertainty of the production is making us think to look up for another technologies and vendors even knowing all the disadvantages and challenges in development HW/FW involved to match the analog/digital capabilities of PSoC 5LP...

 

The market is crazy, I have got contacted by a feasible seller offering me the CY8C5888AXI-LP096 for USD$881= per UNIT!! YES ALMOST NINE HUNDRED AMERICAN DOLLARS!!

And I'm asking, what's Infineon/Cypress doing??

0 Likes
RiAs_1660756
Level 4
25 sign-ins 25 replies posted 10 replies posted
Level 4

Hello, Anna,

Thank you, Anna - and Len, Andreas - for your responses.  I was sort-of pleased to read AjayB-76's reply (below) in that 5LP was going to be available until the 2030's.  By then, I'll be 70, so won't be too worried!

What did bother me was the proposed abandonment of PSoC Creator in favour of a new development platform.  I still use MPLAB 8.92.  In fact, I program PICs in JAL and only use MPLAB for debugging.  MPLAB-X sucks, in my view.

I love using PSoC in general and 5LP in particular.  I love using PSoC Creator - although for bigger projects I use C++ (per Embedded Ninja) and use MS Visual Studio as it has appealing syntax colouring, error detection and other handy features.  PSoC Creator debugs it happily.

I think it is wonderful to be able to dream up a component and implement it in the UDBs.  I'm something of a proselytiser for PSoC because the answer to the question "Can I do this?" is generally "Yes". 

I also find this forum to be a huge asset.  Where I have encountered problems, I have often been assisted on to the right path by contributors (ack: Len!).

So, Infineon, take 5LP out of the scary 'Legacy' and put it back in the reassuring 'Active and Preferred'.  Then get Alan Hawse, Todd Dust etc. to make some great videos promoting it and make some proper in-depth tutorials about, for example, using Datapaths in Verilog, understanding the DFB step-by-step from the ground up, using C# etc. to make configuration interfaces and all the higher-level stuff that makes 5LP such an amazing toolkit.

 

 

ANNA_2615691
Level 4
25 replies posted 10 replies posted 10 likes given
Level 4

Dear @RiAs_1660756 I couldn't be more happy if Infineon/Cypress does what you described!!

I would love to see Alan Hawse resurrecting PSoC 5LP with some videos and new applications in his iotexpert webpage!

Len_CONSULTRON
Level 9
1000 replies posted 750 replies posted 500 likes received
Level 9

Richard,

You bring up quite a few of good points.   

Personally, I use the PSoC5LP for 90% of my projects.   It is in general my platform of choice for basically the reasons you enumerated.

My experience as an engineer in the early '80s, I had to design logic state machines to interface virtually ANY CPU to memory (SRAM, DRAM, EEPROM) and peripherals, (UARTs, ADCs, DACs, etc.) using external 74000-series ICs.  CPUs at that time did not have internal peripherals or memory.  This forced me to create tight and efficient logic designs and maximize my understanding of propagation delay effects to make sure that the the worst-case timing could work under all conditions in the operational temperatures and voltages.

When Programmable Logic Devices (PLDs) became available, this was a blessing.  I could define the "sum of products" (summing using "OR" logic of product terms using "AND" logic).

This allowed for me to:

  • Reduce the number of ICs being used.  In one case, I was able to reduce the board size to 1/3 of the non-PLD design.
  • Pre-test the design using simulation vectors.  
  • Reduce the physical logic levels to improve performance by reducing the overall propagation delays.
  • Make internal logic changes after initial PCB design to minimize or eliminate PCB "Cuts and Adds".

The advent of internal memory and peripherals inside a CPU (MPU) is blessing too.  However, the vendor is basically forcing you to use the memory and peripherals they offer.   It is then up to them to create efficient HW and SW interfaces to these peripherals.   

Peripherals not included in the MPU was still needed.  That is why SPI and I2C protocols were created to minimize GPIO pinning and standardize communication standards.

I first used the PSoC1 which was a hint to the ability of the chip being programmable were the PLD-like environment was flexible enough to be configurable to  different types of peripherals.  This digital blocks were adaptable to some degree of user customization.  In addition, the analog blocks and routing was also programmable.  With some degree of user customization.   For example, I configured the Cypress-offered ADC component and created my own AMUXing in SW by controlling the analog routing fabric.

The PSoC5 and PSoC3 architecture was a significant improvement to the PSoC1 architecture (IMHO).  It further improved the analog routing and allows for much more control of the Digital logic definition and routing.  Digital logic design can be accomplished using

  • Schematic component elements.
  • UDB Editor.
  • Verilog Design Files

This design flexibility allows for creation of very tight and efficient HW state machines internally with no or minimal external connections outside the IC.  This allows me to create very sophisticated implementations of unique HW interfaces that maximize performance and minimize CPU interaction.  For example, using UDB implementation I have created a 14-bit version of a Voltage DAC that once the voltage value is loaded does not require any further CPU resources INCLUDING DMA. Link: /DVDAC14-14-bit-VDAC 

This is virtually impossible using other MPUs from other manufacturers.   The best they might get you is access to DMA.   If this level of digital configurability is achieved with ALTERA and XILINX programmable architectures (at much higher costs).

Using the configurability of PSoC1, PSoC3, PSoC5 and some PSoC4 and PSoC6 parts, I was able to also reduce my Bill-of-Materials (BoM) for the overall projects.   

The Infineon-preferred families of PSoCs are the PSoC4 and PSoC6.   Some but not all of these product families have UDB and analog configurability as seen on the PSoC5.   IMHO, these parts without this flexibility are 'barely' to be considered PSoCs.   They tend to have only fixed digital and analog resources.  The closest thing to a UDB is the SmartIO functionality.  It is good but has it's limitation.

Thank you for bearing with my long-windedness.

Infineon has their reasons for not commiting to moving the PSoC UDB and analog routing forward.  I imagine that most of these reasonings deal with marketability. 

Let's face it.   The engineer that can appreciate the elegance of the PSoC architecture is more rare.

Let us hope that at a minimum, the Infineon continues the product family.   Hopefully this IC shortage will be short-lived.

Len
"Engineering is an Art. The Art of Compromise."
ANNA_2615691
Level 4
25 replies posted 10 replies posted 10 likes given
Level 4

Great post Len, I cannot be more agreed... UDB, DFB in compliment of DMA and other communication peripherals in addition of a nice ARM processor is a winner combo that it's impossible to find in the market even within other families as PSoC 4 and 6...

Len you're totally right, sadly not all the engineers appreciate the elegance of PSoC (some don't even understand the concept of mixed-signal on-chip) and this hole in the marketing is affecting the future of such a nice architecture.

Would be amazing if Infineon/Cypress speak out clearly about PSoC 5LP status and availability...

0 Likes
Len_CONSULTRON
Level 9
1000 replies posted 750 replies posted 500 likes received
Level 9

Anna,

I can imagine that marketing is not the only reason for not advancing the "PSoC"-architecture.

The original designers in Cypress that conceived of this PSoC infrastructure saw value.   Probably the same value we have imagined.   In general, it is 'killer' applications that generate 'killer' sales of the ICs.   I imagine that the sales of PSoCs are decent by due to cost comparisons to other competitor ICs it is a harder sale.

It's probably harder to convince most engineers that for +30% additional cost you can have a PSoC compared to a Microchip.  This would even be a problem for me in a cost-sensitive project.  However, knowing the flexibility of the PSoC, I can reduce my BoM costs by using less externally connected components and with the ability to create custom HW state machines, I can often improve the system performance by lowering the CPU overhead.   Because I can reduce the CPU load, I can either lower the bus frequency (lowering EMI) and/or allowing for more peripherals to be processed with needing a higher bus clock rate.   This allows me to use a 24MHz PSoC instead of upgrading to a 100MHz Microchip because more has to be processed in SW.

Maybe, Infineon needs to talk to PSoC architecture enthusiasts to find out why we appreciate it.   Find out from us how to better market it to the general engineering design community.

Len
"Engineering is an Art. The Art of Compromise."
ANNA_2615691
Level 4
25 replies posted 10 replies posted 10 likes given
Level 4

Totally agree Len, marketing in my opinion is just the tip of the iceberg, but not the only factor here.

 

The advantages of using PSoC are very clear for the engineers that know the technology and use it squeezing its capabilities to optimize the cost/benefit ratio in the product.

To me it's very sad to see it as Legacy and the path to obsolescence, the obvious reason is money and I think this kind of decisions are consequences or collateral-effects after Cypress being purchased by Infineon... 

 

I'm still hoping to get a clear answer/position from Infineon about this subject, as you said would be amazing if Infineon decide to listen to us and bring back the PSoC 5LP!

0 Likes
akurtj
Level 1
5 sign-ins First like received First reply posted
Level 1

Dear Anna, Richard & Len,

thanks a lot for your comments/replies.

I totally agree to your opinions but still no answer(s) from Infineon.

And I doubt that they will answer because then they will make facts even they did already by "pushing the PSoC5LP devices aside".

I had actually two PSoC5LP designs on my roadmap but when I recognized that the PSoC5LP is "legacy" I decided to go away from Infinion. Ok, it took a month to re-design the schematics but now I have the commitment from the supplier of a normal µC that they will deliver 10years+.

And yes, it takes more components, more board space and so on but, but, but 😉

I wish you the best and stay healthy!

BR,

   Andreas

ANNA_2615691
Level 4
25 replies posted 10 replies posted 10 likes given
Level 4

Andreas I was secretly hoping for a mistake by Infineon webmaster as PSoC 5LP is listed under 8/16 bits Legacy when obviously it's 32bits and under that classification doesn't appear...

I know such an error is not common but not impossible, right?😅

 

0 Likes
akurtj
Level 1
5 sign-ins First like received First reply posted
Level 1

Well, the Product Management of PSoC5LP should have an eye on it but maybe they have closed their eyes 😞

0 Likes
DennisS_46
Employee
25 solutions authored 25 likes received 50 replies posted
Employee

Anna, et. al.:

The link that Andreas provided goes to legacy 8/16 bit microcontrollers. This lists PSoC1 (Cypress proprietary processor), PSoC3 (8051 used under license), and a few others. The PSoC5LP is listed on a separate page as a legacy 32-bit processor., not 8/16 bit. I believe that Andreas mis-read. That said, legacy in this case means that we (Infineon) anticipate making no further extensions to this family in die or in Creator tools. The new product world has moved on to PSoC4, then PSoC6, but we keep happily deriving revenue from the older stuff. PSoC1 still generates significant revenue. PSoC5LP generates good revenue and is the core of all of our programmers. PSoC4 is still a big runner. These parts 1,5,4 will be around a long time. No, I can't give you an end-of-life date. Keep buying and we'll keep building.

---- Dennis (THE senior PSoC apps engineer)

0 Likes
ANNA_2615691
Level 4
25 replies posted 10 replies posted 10 likes given
Level 4

Hi Dennis.

 

Thank you for your reply!

 

It's really nice to see there are clear responses from Infineon about this subject, and at least for me is good to know the plans to keep supporting the technology.

However I can tell you Andreas didn't mis-read any, I also see the PSoC 5LP under Legacy 8/16 bits webpage, but now it's fixed and under 32 bits as you notice.

Another important subject is availability, I hope we would be able to get at least a feasible/estimated date in which we will find chips in distributors again...

 

BR

0 Likes
Len_CONSULTRON
Level 9
1000 replies posted 750 replies posted 500 likes received
Level 9

Andreas,

I'm personally sorry to hear you were compelled leave the PSoC-family of parts.  However it is understandable under the circumstances. 

 

... And yes, it takes more components, more board space and so on but, but, but 😉


I'm glad you posted this comment.  I guess I'm not the only one to find the PSoC architecture to be a "gem" amongst other's "pebbles"

You keep well too!

Len
"Engineering is an Art. The Art of Compromise."
0 Likes
AjayB_76
Moderator
Moderator 100 sign-ins 10 questions asked 5 questions asked
Moderator

Hi all, 

I agree 'Legacy' is not the right term to use. I had a chat with marketing teams about the roadmap and supply commitments on PSoC5LP. There is no plan to obsolete PSoC5LP at any point in time. The expectation is to support the part at least for this decade (2030). 

The term legacy may be used because of fundamental change in architecture in the next generation of products. The PSoC6 has a much more modular architecture than the customizable architecture in the PSoC5LP. Also we have invested in new software environment of ModusToolBox. 

We totally understand the benefits and flexibility of PSoC5LP and we will continue to support the same to help get your designs in. The team is also there to help you migrate to newer devices retaining almost all features of PSoC Creator ( UDB cough - may be not as of now).

Please be assured that we will continue to support PSoC5LP from a supply perspective and a design support perspective. 

ANNA_2615691
Level 4
25 replies posted 10 replies posted 10 likes given
Level 4

Thanks @AjayB_76 it's good to know that PSoC 5LP still on!!

Could you also give us a hint of when will be chips available again? - As I posted before there's a lot of speculation in the market with overpriced chips going craziest as 50 times its regular price... Would be amazing to have at least a tentative date in which we can find chips again...

BR

0 Likes
AjayB_76
Moderator
Moderator 100 sign-ins 10 questions asked 5 questions asked
Moderator

Hi @ANNA_2615691 

I can check about supply situation of PSoC5LP into the distribution channel and get back. However, as you probably know, there is a general shortage of chips which has extended into all products and technologies. The 130nm on which P5 is based on is a high runner and this could be cause of this. 

0 Likes
ANNA_2615691
Level 4
25 replies posted 10 replies posted 10 likes given
Level 4

Hi @AjayB_76 of course I'm aware of the chip shortage situation it has impacted us a lot, but I will really appreciate if there's some information about dates or plans in which the PSoC 5LP will resume production and get back to the market, so please check and let us know 🙏🏽

Thank you so much!!

0 Likes
AjayB_76
Moderator
Moderator 100 sign-ins 10 questions asked 5 questions asked
Moderator

As you all know we recently migrated the Cypress.com website to Infineon.com. We are continuously working to update webpages and the user experience. We are actively in the process of moving the PSoC 5LP to its proper place in the main 32-bit MCU section of the web vs its current location in the Legacy section. Please know that we are committed to the longevity of PSoC 5LP products. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to reach out to your local sales representative, they have visibility to the supply side situation. Thank you as always for your support of PSoC MCUs!

LeBa_1250741
Level 1
Welcome! First question asked First reply posted
Level 1

**BUMP**

PSOC5 LP has been unavailable for a year now and our tier one distributors still cannot give us any insight into when they will be available again. We as Infineon and they say ask your distributor. This is not trivial, as we spend hundreds of thousands on engineering and compliance. Please Infinion: tell us your plans to solve this debacle.

0 Likes
RiAs_1660756
Level 4
25 sign-ins 25 replies posted 10 replies posted
Level 4

I have a friend at AD.  He tells me that all the available silicon is going to the big boys as they have the most influence.  My business is a small outfit and the cost of a redesign isn't prohibitive but it does mean having to withdraw all our more recent products that use PSoC.

My old boss used to say, "First rule of businees: don't bankrupt your suppliers."  He might have added, "Don't bankrupt your customers, either."

As a personal view, we ain't seen nuttin' yet.  I don't think this is going to get better any time soon.  When the production lines start rolling again, half the PSoC users will have abandoned the line and Infineon will dump it in favour of more modern technology.  All these electronic gadgets represent such a huge market in comparison to the specialised stuff, we'll be back using vacuum tubes.

Frankly, that would please me no end.

0 Likes
akurtj
Level 1
5 sign-ins First like received First reply posted
Level 1

Thanks a lot for this clarification AjayB_76.

It might be a good idea to clean-up the webpages regarding:

- The movement of the PCoC5LP devices under Legacy

- The grouping of PSoC5LP into 8/16bit section

 

Maybe I will find my way back to PSoC5LP when I see the devices listed at the distributors and available for order.

0 Likes
Praveen
Community Manager
Community Manager 250 sign-ins 100 sign-ins 50 replies posted
Community Manager

As you all know we recently migrated the Cypress.com website to Infineon.com. We are continuously working to update webpages and the user experience. We are actively in the process of moving the PSoC 5LP to its proper place in the main 32-bit MCU section of the web vs its current location in the Legacy section. Please know that we are committed to the longevity of PSoC 5LP products. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to reach out to your local sales representative. Thank you as always for your support of PSoC MCUs!

Cheers
Praveen