Is there any plans for MCU that has STM32F407 specs, but has CAN-FD interfaces instead of CAN?

[Alexander Novikov]

..

[Tesla DeLorean]

I doubt this design is going to be revisited. Talk to local sales staff/engineers.

Review new parts for commonality of foot-print, 144-pin devices have generally had the best migration path.

[Uwe Bonnes]

STM32G474 has no ethernet but CANFD. Did you look at the new STM32H7 variant?

[Alexander Novikov]

Yes, but, STM32H7 is too overloaded with features I dont need.

[Alexander Novikov]

Generally I need Cortex-M4, >120Mhz, USB FS, CAN-FD (at least 2), and Ethernet MAC. STM32F407 is closest. I see all new MCUs (G0/G4/L5 lines) now utilize CAN-FD instead of old CAN, but have no Ethernet. So I expect some new chip like STM32F407 with CAN-FD. Microchip already has SAME54 - this one is exacly what I am looking for. But SAME54 has lots of drawbacks on overall design of the other chip peripherals (DMA, clocks, timers, ADC etc...)

[TDK]

So the STM32H7 has everything you need but you don't want to use it because it's "overloaded with features"? How is that a problem? Why not use what you want and leave the other features untouched?

[Alexander Novikov]

The problem is its price

[TDK]

On Digikey (qty 1):

STM32F407 is $9.29

STM32H745 is $11.71

I doubt they're going to introduce a new line of chips between those two price points.

[Alexander Novikov]

On our local distributor

STM32F407ZGT6 is about 5$

STM32H745 11$

[Danish1]

Given the cost of all the other bits in a project (including the major one of time and effort writing and debugging the code), that sort of price-difference is negligible for small production runs (say 10 units).

And for larger production runs I'm sure you'll be able to get a better price. I've even known cases where the the price difference reverses in sufficient quantity.

Having said that, I've been trying to port some code from stm32f7 to stm32h7 for a long time and I'm still hitting differences.

Regards,

Danish

[Alexander Novikov]

I am porting from STM32F107, this is why STM32F407 is preferable - it has a lots of compatible stuff.

[waclawek.jan]

Porting nontrivial codebase from 'F1 all the way through 'H7 is IMO a hard and bumpy road with potentially major debugging ahead. It of course depends on the nature of the code, the ratio between "true controller" and "general purpose" code.

Now, we are not insiders here, but as others pointed out, it's unlikely ST will add a Cortex-M4 with both ETH/LCD and "controller" stuff like CAN is. The 'F4 came around when the Cortex-M7 was not ready yet. Note that their newest addition, 'G4, used up the "4" number, and is straighforwardly targeted at the 'F3 area of applications (i.e. motor). ETH goes together with LCD more into the "general computing" and "needs more horsepower" area, that's why they pair up better with the Cortex-M7.

So, in short, I wouldn't hold my breath. If you don't want to go the bumpy road, you may try the multi-chip way (either external CAN controller, or cooperating MCUs, one with CAN other with ETH) - although that's not obstacle-less and not price-optimal either, I know.

JW