STMicroelectronics debuts single-chip positioning device for multiple global navigation systems

STMicroelectronics announces the impending release of Teseo II, a new generation of single-chip stand-alone positioning receivers for Portable Navigation Devices, in-car navigation and telematics applications. These Systems-on-Chips are monolithic devices capable of receiving signals from multiple satellite navigation systems, including GPS, GALILEO, GLONASS and QZSS.

Listed features include 3rd generation positioning receiver with 32 tracking channels and 2 fast acquisition channels compatible with GPS, Galileo, Glonass and QZSS systems; high performance ARM946 MCU (up to 208 MHz); 256 Kbyte embedded TCM/SRAM; FSMC external memory interface (NAND, NOR and SRAM); external SQI Flash interface; one 16-bit Extended Function Timer (EFT) with input capture/ output compare and PWM; four 32-bit free running timers/ counters; Real Time Clock (RTC) circuit; 3 UARTs (one full for modem support); 1 I2C master/slave interface; 1 Synchronous Serial Port (SSP, Motorola-SPI supported); USB2.0 dual role full speed (12 MHz) with integrated physical layer transceiver; 2 Secure-Digital Multimedia Memory Card Interfaces (SDMMC); 2 Controller Area Network (CAN); 1 Multichannel Serial Port (MSP); GPIO port for a total of up to 64 GPIOs; 8-channels ADC (10 bit), and selectable 1.8 V or 3.3 V I/Os for specific I/O ports

The data brief download is available. Full production is slated for Q3 2011. Samples will reportedly be available soon, but the TFBGA169 package means we’ll have to wait for the eval kit in order to try this one out.

Join the Conversation


  1. Looks cool on paper.

    However given the atrocious performance of the Cartesio chipset (especially with regards to WAAS reception, it took them nearly two years to release firmware that got it to even work in Garmin Oregons, and even then it will fail to lock on in many situations where other chipsets work perfectly), I personally would advise people to be wary of this chipset.

  2. Plenty out there, choose one. Look at the list at Sparkfun as an example.

    There are a number of modules available using the well regarded SiRF III or MTKv2 chipsets. Even the dated SiRF III blows away STM’s previous GPS chipset (the Cartesio), and unless STM makes a major overhaul to general purpose and shows a commitment to properly support their GPS chipsets (Come on, 1-2 years to get WAAS just partially working in the Garmin Oregon? It partially worked much earlier in the DeLorme PN40 but is still only in a partially functional state, it’s clear STM is not even bothering to support their two largest customers.), I wouldn’t base a design on their ICs. Multi-system support is interesting on paper, but not that useful in practice. GLONASS is barely in orbit, Galileo keeps getting delayed over and over again and right now only has funding for a partial constellation, QZSS is a different animal but would only be beneficial near Japan if the chip’s support for it even works. (See above regarding STM’s track record with augmentation systems like WAAS.)

    The RF frontend also lacks GPS L2 support, which would be a more interesting feature with the GPS Modernization (L1C, L2C, L5) signals going live over the next few years.

    A lot of shininess on paper, but in practice likely little to offer that is not already available from proven chipsets like the MTKv2.

  3. Sounded so good but if your comments are anything to go by then something to avoid. As for being in a 169 BGA package alot of the pins can actually be joined together in clumps which makes life slightly easier lol

  4. Yup. Obviously on paper it has some pretty nice potential, however, given the packaging challenges and STM’s actual receiver performance track record, I would not hold up any project waiting for this chip to show up, as opposed to using a proven chipset like those mentioned above (SiRF III or MTKv2)

  5. Interesting chip.

    One thing to note about it – It appears to be only an RF frontend IC (See the baseband outputs, no mention of number of correlator channels), it is not a complete receiver solution.

    It would be a good thing to play with if you want to experiment with rolling your own correlator algorithms. (Similar hardware is probably used in Cornell’s ECE 5840 class – )

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.