<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/cfs-file/__key/system/syndication/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>nRF9151 UART: DMA vs FIFO – Seeking Fast TX with FIFO Setup</title><link>https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/f/nordic-q-a/123378/nrf9151-uart-dma-vs-fifo-seeking-fast-tx-with-fifo-setup</link><description>I’m working with nRF9151 + Toolchain 2.9.0 and wanted to share my experience &amp;amp; issue while sending ~7kB data over UART. I’ve tried both DMA &amp;amp; FIFO-based approaches — here’s what I learned, and where I need help. 
 
 DMA-Based UART (Async API) To achieve</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>Telligent Community 13</generator><lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2025 11:41:23 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/f/nordic-q-a/123378/nrf9151-uart-dma-vs-fifo-seeking-fast-tx-with-fifo-setup" /><item><title>RE: nRF9151 UART: DMA vs FIFO – Seeking Fast TX with FIFO Setup</title><link>https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/thread/544446?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2025 11:41:23 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">137ad170-7792-4731-bb38-c0d22fbe4515:0c54d2fa-faa4-4c74-a899-043c67acfc38</guid><dc:creator>Hakon</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Hello,&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;This is indeed the reason why we introduced async API years ago. Interrupt driven API is slow, RX can only be done with interrupt on every byte, TX could be a bit faster but async API is recommended for good performance.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>