Remix.run Logo
alnwlsn 5 hours ago

I kind of wish these all weren't called ESP32. ESP8266 and ESP8285 -> ESP32 made sense, but now we have 10+ different versions with different features and different architectures.

Kind of like how in every thread involving a Raspberry Pi Pico (RP2030/RP2350), there's always someone confusing it with the single board computer version.

The ESP32 (Classic, usually WROOM-32E) is still usually what comes to mind when I hear ESP32.

peteforde an hour ago | parent | next [-]

You're fundamentally misunderstanding how MCU families work, I'm afraid.

There's not 10+ versions with different features. The word version strongly implies that there's an incremental progression over time, and they keep screwing up by adding and taking away modules. What jerks!

What's actually happening is that you have 4-5 different product lines that all share the same SDK, design philosophy, pricing structure, supply chain and support channels. Each one of these dimensions is extremely important to engineering teams designing products around them. It's not about hobbyists who are learning the ropes, although IMO they do a pretty good job of supporting those folks, too.

Within those lines (at this point, primarily S, C, H and P) you actually do have versions; for example, ESP32-S2 is no longer recommended for new designs because you should use ESP32-S3.

Ultimately, the lens you need to use to understand this stuff is: can I place an ESP32-labeled chip on my PCB and program it using the same SDK?

The same is true for the RP2XXX series of MCUs; if someone is confused by the difference between a microcontroller and a SBC then they might just be in the wrong place.

Bigger picture, some advice: when confronted by something like this, you will get further faster if you don't lead with the assumption that you have things figured out and everyone else is doing it wrong. Instead, keep an open mind and ask lots of questions. We're living in a golden era of enabling autodidacts but that's only true for folks who go long on humble curiosity.

pantalaimon 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But it's the same scheme as STM32, EFM32, GD32, …

vitally3643 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes and those schemes are just as bad as Espressif's

randyrand 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It signals ESP-IDF compatibility

JCTheDenthog 4 hours ago | parent [-]

They can signal that with numbers other than 32, the "ESP" part is what matters.

9rx 3 hours ago | parent [-]

ESP-IDF is only compatible with the ESP32 range of devices, not all ESP-prefixed devices, so "ESP" alone is not sufficient information to satisfy the earlier comment.

yonatan8070 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's like these for other families too, you've got your STM32, then you can get the sub-models ranging from entry-level STM32C0 to the full Linux chips like the STM32MP2, with lots of options in the middle

reaperducer 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I kind of wish these all weren't called ESP32. ESP8266 and ESP8285 -> ESP32 made sense, but now we have 10+ different version

They've been hanging around with Sony.

Apple: AirPods

Sony: WMDF559J649Q-1

Etheryte 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Showing up in search results, or in this day and age LLM results, is still king. If your famous product is known as the ESP32, it doesn't hurt sales to spin other products off the same line. It might hurt clarity, glance value and many other things, but it will drive people to you.

asadm 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

it's a marketing thing now

andrewstuart 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

And toss away the brand name ?