Hardware difference

I am looking at this project:

In the components , the arduino nano is listed. I have a spare one so I thought , great, I'll put it to use. But the schematics shows a an Arduino Uno.

Does anyone know what the connections to the nano should be, or should it be an Uno which is used.

The connections are all the same whether you're using a Nano or an Uno. The Nano uses the same microcontroller as the Uno so it's essentially the same thing, but in a more compact form.

Ok, great, thanks for that.

You're welcome. I'm glad if I was able to be of assistance. Enjoy!
Per

pert:
The Nano uses the same microcontroller as the Uno so it's essentially the same thing, but in a more compact form.

Is it (the NANO's one) not a variant of the UNO's?

It's not clear to me what the question is. The Uno's microcontroller is the ATmega328P. The Nano's microcontroller is the ATmega328P. The most significant difference between the two is that the Nano has pins A6 and A7, which the Uno does not. This is because the original Uno used the DIP package of the ATmega328P, which doesn't have the extra two analog input channels. The Nano has always used the SMD package of the ATmega328P, which does have the extra two analog channels. The Uno is now also sold with the SMD ATmega328P package, but they still didn't break out A6 and A7 on the SMD Uno.

The Nano has traditionally used a different bootloader than the Uno, which takes a 2 kB boot section and uses 57600 baud communication speed for uploads. The Uno uses the the optiboot bootloader, which takes a 0.5 kB boot section and uses 115200 baud for uploads. The official Arduino Nanos were changed to start using Optiboot as well last year, but they left the boot section at 2 kB. I have not heard any reports of clone or derivative Nano manufacturers switching to Optiboot yet.

The Uno uses ATmega16U2 USB to TTL serial chip, while the Nano uses the FT232. For most people, the only reason they would care about this is that different drivers are required for each, but these drivers come with the Arduino IDE. Some people have taken advantage of the programmable nature of the ATmega16U2, but this is quite rare.

There are some other small differences in the hardware you could see from comparing the schematics.

However, none of that makes any difference for the project avalon66 wants to do.

pert:
However, none of that makes any difference for the project avalon66 wants to do.

Yes! The NANO and UNO are compatible (except NANO has two extra analog channels) at the Arduino Level. But, the microcontrollers that the boards hold are not 'same' (can we say that they are similar) in the light of the following Comparison Table.

Sn. Features NANO UNO

  1. Type MEGA328 ATMEGA328P
  2. Pin 32 28
  3. Package TQFP DIL
  4. Analog Channels 8 6
  5. Ground Pins 3 2
  6. Vcc Pins 2 1

GolamMostafa:
Yes! The NANO and UNO are compatible (except NANO has two extra analog channels) at the Arduino Level. But, the microcontrollers that the boards hold are not 'same' (can we say that they are similar) in the light of the following Comparison Table.

Sn. Features NANO UNO

  1. Type MEGA328 ATMEGA328P
  2. Pin 32 28
  3. Package TQFP DIL
  4. Analog Channels 8 6
  5. Ground Pins 3 2
  6. Vcc Pins 2 1

Since we are being picky, the Nano does also use the ATMEGA328P.

GolamMostafa:
the microcontrollers that the boards hold are not 'same'

They are the same microcontroller. The silicon is identical, they are just in different packages.

Look, I've already proven to you that I know the difference between the two packages. You've already proven to yourself that you know it also. The difference between the two doesn't make any difference for avalon66's project. So what is the point of this discussion? You're not going to teach me anything. I'm not going to teach you anything. You're just wasting both our time and potentially confusing avalon66 for no reason.

pert:
They are the same microcontroller. The silicon is identical, they are just in different packages.

The Oxford Dictionary takes 'same' as for 'exactly similar' which means identical; but, the microcontrollers of the two boards are not identical.