pros and cons (S130 vs S110 vs S120)

[Ehsan]

Hi, We are assessing the pros and cons to port our software to work on S130. We are currently using S110 (Peripheral) and S120 (Central) on nRF51822 rev.3.

Based on the specifications the Flash usage on S130 is more than two others, but the RAM usage is less [which is a bit strange for me]. Do you confirm that?

Flash required: S130 (0x1B000)> S120 (0x1D000)> S110 (0x18000) Minimum RAM required: S130 (0x13C8)< S120 (0x2800)< S110 (0x19D8)

I am not sure how much these resource consumption difference with the same program can affect the ultimate power consumption. Can you give me clues to calculate roughly? In the BLE power consumption profile figures (S130_SDS_v2.0) I cannot see any unit or number for the current consumption. Can you explain to me why?

How's your prediction of the future SDK supports? I mean do you see any significant modifications that would not be applied on S110 and S120? If yes, can you tell me which potential modification are you working on S130?

Thanks, Ehsan

[Petter Myhre]

I confirm. The thing is that with S130 v2.0 the RAM usage depends on a number of things, the number of links, the number of TX and RX buffers on these links and so on. So the minimum RAM usage is very low, but to figure out the actual ram usage you need to look into the RAM usage with a configuration that fulfill your requirements.

The current consumption of S120, and only using S130 only as a central should be very similar. The same with S110, and using S130 only as a peripheral. Please see this for how to calculate current consumption.

There are no new releases planned for S110, S120, or S130. So we are not working on any potiential modifications for the S130.

If you want new features you should consider moving to nRF52.

[Ehsan]

Thanks Petter. It is more clear now.