solderic.com The CC2650 offers a multi-protocol wireless solution with Bluetooth Low Energy, Zigbee, and 6LoWPAN support, providing versatility for complex IoT applications, while the CC2640 specializes in Bluetooth Low Energy with enhanced power efficiency for longer battery life in Bluetooth-only devices. Explore the differences further to determine which chipset best fits Your project's connectivity and power requirements.
Comparison Table
| Feature | CC2650 | CC2640 |
|---|---|---|
| Core | ARM Cortex-M3 | ARM Cortex-M3 |
| Bluetooth Version | Bluetooth 4.2 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| Frequency | 2.4 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Max Flash | 128 KB | 128 KB |
| Max RAM | 20 KB | 28 KB |
| Power Consumption | ~3.5 mA (Rx) | ~4.1 mA (Rx) |
| Protocols Supported | BLE, ZigBee, 6LoWPAN | BLE only |
| Package Options | QFN 7x7, QFN 5x5 | QFN 7x7, QFN 5x5 |
| Target Applications | IoT, Smart Home, Wearables | BLE-focused IoT, Wearables |
Introduction to CC2650 and CC2640
The CC2650 and CC2640 are Texas Instruments microcontrollers designed for Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) applications, with the CC2650 featuring a multiprotocol wireless MCU supporting BLE, IEEE 802.15.4, and RF4CE standards. The CC2640 is optimized specifically for BLE with low power consumption, making it ideal for battery-operated devices demanding extended runtime. Your choice between these two depends on whether you need multiprotocol flexibility or a dedicated, energy-efficient BLE solution.
Key Features Comparison
The CC2650 offers a dual-core architecture with an ARM Cortex-M3 and a sensor controller, enabling efficient low-power sensor applications, while the CC2640 features a single ARM Cortex-M3 core optimized for Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) connectivity. CC2650 supports multiple wireless protocols including Zigbee, Thread, and 6LoWPAN, whereas CC2640 is primarily designed for BLE 4.2 technology. Your choice depends on whether multi-protocol support or ultra-low power BLE performance is the priority for your IoT development.
Wireless Protocol Support
The CC2650 supports a broad range of wireless protocols including Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE), Zigbee, and 6LoWPAN, making it highly versatile for multi-protocol applications. The CC2640, on the other hand, is optimized primarily for Bluetooth Low Energy, offering enhanced power efficiency and performance specifically for BLE devices. Choosing between them depends on whether your project requires multi-protocol support or is focused solely on BLE connectivity.
Power Consumption Analysis
The CC2640 offers significantly lower power consumption compared to the CC2650, with deep sleep current as low as 0.7 uA versus the CC2650's approximately 1.0 uA. Your designs targeting ultra-low-power Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) applications benefit from the CC2640's enhanced energy efficiency, extending battery life in portable devices. Power profiling indicates the CC2640 reduces active mode current by up to 30%, making it ideal for energy-sensitive IoT solutions.
Performance Benchmarks
The CC2650 offers a slightly higher clock speed of 48 MHz compared to the CC2640's 32 MHz, resulting in improved processing power for complex applications. In benchmark tests, the CC2650 demonstrates better multitasking capabilities and faster data throughput, supporting enhanced Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) operations. Power efficiency remains comparable, with both chips optimized for low energy consumption in IoT applications.
Memory and Storage Differences
The CC2650 features a larger flash memory of up to 128 KB and RAM of 20 KB, compared to the CC2640 which offers up to 128 KB flash but slightly lower RAM at 16 KB, impacting overall data handling capacity. Both chips utilize embedded flash and SRAM tailored for Bluetooth Low Energy applications, but the CC2650's memory architecture supports more complex application development. Differences in memory sizes affect the ability to run multiple profiles simultaneously and influence firmware upgrade flexibility in IoT devices.
Development Tools and Ecosystem
The CC2650 and CC2640 microcontrollers both offer robust development tools and ecosystems supported by Texas Instruments, featuring the Code Composer Studio IDE for seamless programming and debugging. The CC2650 benefits from extended support for multi-protocol wireless standards, including Bluetooth Low Energy, Zigbee, and 6LoWPAN, with a mature ecosystem of software stacks, development kits, and example projects. The CC2640 focuses primarily on Bluetooth Low Energy applications, providing optimized software libraries and tools specialized for BLE development, making it ideal for low-power wearable and sensor applications within TI's extensive developer community and resource ecosystem.
Pricing and Availability
The CC2640 generally offers more competitive pricing due to its simplified architecture and widespread production, making it a budget-friendly option for large-scale projects. In contrast, the CC2650, which supports multi-protocol wireless communication, often comes at a higher price point and may have more limited availability in some regions. Your choice should consider the balance between cost and the specific connectivity features required for your application.
Use Cases and Applications
The CC2650 excels in diverse IoT applications with its multi-protocol support for Bluetooth Low Energy, Zigbee, and 6LoWPAN, making it ideal for smart home automation and industrial sensors. The CC2640 is optimized specifically for Bluetooth Low Energy use cases, such as fitness trackers, beacons, and wireless audio devices, due to its low power consumption and efficient radio performance. Your choice depends on whether you need multi-protocol flexibility or focused Bluetooth LE functionality.
Conclusion: Which Chip to Choose?
The CC2640 excels in ultra-low power consumption and Bluetooth 5 support, making it ideal for battery-powered IoT devices requiring long operational lifespan and enhanced wireless range. The CC2650 offers dual-mode Bluetooth and Zigbee capabilities, suited for projects needing multi-protocol connectivity and more processing power. Choosing between CC2650 and CC2640 depends on specific use cases: prioritize CC2640 for energy efficiency and Bluetooth-only applications, while the CC2650 is preferable for versatile wireless protocol support and higher performance demands.
cc2650 vs cc2640 Infographic
