Chip vs Chip

CC2652R vs STM32WB55

<\/script>\n
'; }, get iframeSnippet() { const domain = '{ SITE_DOMAIN }'; const type = '{ embed_type }'; const slug = '{ embed_slug }'; return ''; }, get activeSnippet() { return this.method === 'script' ? this.scriptSnippet : this.iframeSnippet; }, copySnippet() { navigator.clipboard.writeText(this.activeSnippet).then(() => { this.copied = true; setTimeout(() => { this.copied = false; }, 2000); }); } }" @keydown.escape.window="open = false" @click.outside="open = false">

Embed This Widget

Theme


      
    


    
    

      Widget powered by
      .
      Free, no account required.
    

  




    
    
Side-by-side comparison of CC2652R and STM32WB55 BLE SoCs.

    
    

      
    

  


  
  
  

    
      

        A
        
CC2652R

      

      

    
    
      

        B
        
STM32WB55

      

      

    
  

  

  
  

  






  
  

    
CC2652R vs STM32WB55: TI Multi-Protocol vs. ST Dual-Core BLE+802.15.4


Both the CC2652R and STM32WB55 use a dual-core architecture to isolate radio processing from application code, and both support BLE alongside IEEE 802.15.4. Yet they differ significantly in ecosystem philosophy, memory layout, and peripheral richness. This comparison helps teams choose between TI's and ST's approach to multi-protocol wireless.




Overview


CC2652R from Texas Instruments combines a 48 MHz Cortex-M4F application processor with a Cortex-M0 radio controller in a 7 × 7 mm QFN-48 package. It supports BLE 5.1, Thread, Zigbee, and proprietary 2.4 GHz simultaneously. TI's SimpleLink SDK provides a unified software platform across the entire CC26xx/CC13xx family, and SysConfig enables graphical pin and stack configuration. Matter certification via Thread is available through TI's certified stack.


STM32WB55 from STMicroelectronics takes a similar dual-core approach: a 64 MHz Cortex-M4 application core and a 32 MHz Cortex-M0+ radio core, packaged in VFQFPN-68 or WLCSP-100 options. The M0+ core runs ST's proprietary wireless firmware (BLE stack and IEEE 802.15.4 for Thread/Zigbee) as a sealed binary, while the M4 runs user application code. With 1 MB flash and 256 KB SRAM, the WB55 provides significantly more on-chip non-volatile storage than CC2652R. It integrates USB 2.0 FS, LCD controller, AES-256 hardware accelerator, and the full STM32 peripheral set — making it attractive to teams already embedded in the STM32 ecosystem.




Key Differences


    

  • Flash: STM32WB55 has 1 MB vs. CC2652R's 352 KB — nearly 3× more for application code, OTA images, and data storage.
    • 

  • SRAM: STM32WB55 has 256 KB total (split across application and radio domains) vs. CC2652R's 352 KB — CC2652R has more contiguous SRAM.
    • 

  • Radio firmware: STM32WB55's radio (M0+ core) runs closed-source ST firmware updated via ST's binary distribution; CC2652R's radio controller (M0) runs TI's open ROM with a well-documented patch mechanism.
    • 

  • Peripherals: STM32WB55 integrates USB 2.0 FS, LCD controller, 12-bit ADC, SAI audio interface, and more; CC2652R has a leaner peripheral set focused on sensor I/O.
    • 

  • STM32 ecosystem: WB55 is fully compatible with STM32CubeIDE, STM32CubeMX, HAL libraries, and the vast STM32 middleware ecosystem — a massive advantage for teams with existing STM32 expertise.
    • 

  • Power consumption: CC2652R achieves ~1 µA in standby; STM32WB55 achieves ~2.2 µA in Shutdown mode — comparable, with CC2652R slightly ahead.
    • 

  • Package flexibility: STM32WB55 is available in 100-ball WLCSP for ultra-compact designs alongside the 68-pin QFN; CC2652R is QFN-48 only.
    • 





Use Cases


CC2652R Excels At


Thread/Zigbee/BLE concurrent operation with a clean software architecture is a CC2652R strength. TI's SimpleLink SDK explicitly supports dynamic multi-stack switching and concurrent BLE advertising alongside a Thread mesh — with well-documented examples and application notes covering the timing intricacies.


Cost-optimized smart home sensors where the peripheral set required is simple (UART, SPI, I²C, GPIOs) and multi-protocol is essential fit the CC2652R's profile precisely, often at a lower unit cost than WB55 in volume.


STM32WB55 Excels At


STM32-ecosystem products are the obvious home for WB55. A team building a wired+wireless device — say, an industrial controller with USB HID interface, CAN bus, and BLE wireless provisioning — can reuse HAL drivers, RTOS middleware, and development tools across both the wireless SoC and wired companion MCUs.


USB-connected BLE bridges and dongles benefit from WB55's on-chip USB 2.0 FS, enabling a single-chip USB BLE dongle design without any external USB interface IC.


Applications with large firmware or file systems — field-deployable devices needing A/B OTA update partitions, or devices storing calibration data and configuration files — benefit from WB55's 1 MB flash.




Verdict


The CC2652R is the cleaner choice when multi-protocol performance (especially Thread + Zigbee + BLE concurrently) and TI's SimpleLink ecosystem are the priorities. Its radio architecture and SDK are optimized for protocol co-existence in a way that WB55's closed radio firmware makes harder to tune.


The STM32WB55 is the better choice when the development team already knows STM32, when USB connectivity is required, or when 1 MB of on-chip flash eliminates an external SPI flash chip. The STM32 peripheral ecosystem's breadth is unmatched in the wireless SoC space.

  

  

  
  

  
  

    




  
자주 묻는 질문


  

    
    

      
      

        
Our comparisons use verified datasheet specifications to create side-by-side tables. Each comparison includes a verdict explaining when to choose each option based on your project requirements.