Wiznet makers

Overview

Choosing an Ethernet controller for an embedded product isn’t a simple spec-sheet race. In practice, firmware complexity, development/validation time, production cost, and long-term maintenance risk determine success. This article compares WIZnet W5500 and Microchip ENC28J60 under equivalent conditions and, beyond raw numbers, examines real engineering factors such as TCP/IP offload (hardware stack), buffer architecture, SPI efficiency, and EMI/certification difficulty.

Key questions this guide helps you answer:

Which controller best fits our MCU and firmware resources?

For workloads where responsiveness and throughput matter (OTA, web dashboards, streaming), which chip has the edge?

From a total cost of ownership (TCO) standpoint, which one reduces costs across development, production, and maintenance?

Bottom line: if your priorities are productization, long-term support, and high performance, the W5500 is advantageous. If your focus is education, retro projects, or breadboard convenience, the ENC28J60 remains a practical alternative.

Note: This article is a summary of Chipmall’s “W5500 vs ENC28J60” post. For full technical details, test results, comparison tables, and the latest updates, please visit the original article on Chipmall.
Source: https://www.chipmall.com/blogs/w5500-vs-enc28j60_122

Key Takeaways at a Glance

Goal: Choose based on firmware difficulty, production cost, and time-to-market, not just datasheet specs.

Conclusion: For commercial/semi-pro products, the W5500 leads in speed, code simplicity, price, and LTS.

Exception: For 8-bit MCUs, breadboards, and retro hardware, ENC28J60 (DIP) is still practical.

Why “Real-World First” Beats “Specs First”

Perceived performance in embedded systems depends heavily on protocol offload, buffer size, and SPI efficiency. More than headline Mbps, responsiveness/CPU utilization/debug risk drives product quality and schedule.

W5500 vs ENC28J60: Core Comparison Table

Source: https://www.chipmall.com/blogs/w5500-vs-enc28j60_122

Firmware Impact

W5500: Hard-wired TCP/IP (ARP/TCP/UDP), so the MCU mainly does simple register I/O.

ENC28J60: Provides only MAC+PHY → implementation, tuning, and maintenance of a software stack (e.g., lwIP) fall on you.

Real-world example: On a Cortex-M3, ENC28J60 + lwIP ≈ 40 KB+ of flash; W5500 ≈ 6 KB.

Image source: https://www.chipmall.com/blogs/w5500-vs-enc28j60_122

Real-World Performance: Throughput, Latency, and CPU Use

Test setup: STM32F103 (72 MHz)

W5500: Near ~92 Mbps in burst SPI, stable latency, minimal CPU interrupts

ENC28J60: About ~5 Mbps with standard 20 MHz SPI, higher jitter, occasional packet delays

Implication: For OTA, web dashboards, and streaming, the W5500 feels 10–20× more responsive.

The W5500’s internal buffer and hardware-managed TCP/IP offload substantially reduce MCU cycles, especially under sustained load. In contrast, the ENC28J60’s firmware-driven approach makes the MCU handle every packet, ACK, and retransmission, increasing CPU utilization and jitter and adding stack-tuning overhead.

Image source: https://www.chipmall.com/blogs/w5500-vs-enc28j60_122

Hardware Design: Layout, Power, and EMI

W5500: QFN/LQFP favor compact layouts; using modules (e.g., W5500-EVB) with integrated magnetics and Auto-MDIX simplifies BOM and layout.

ENC28J60: DIP-28 is breadboard-friendly but needs external magnetics/filters, raising EMI management effort.

Power: W5500 ~132 mA (100 Mbps FDX) vs. ENC28J60 ~180 mA (10 Mbps).

Tip: If you care about compliance, SI, and board space, pick W5500. For quick demos on legacy 5 V boards, ENC28J60 (DIP) has its charm.

Cost (TCO): Beyond the Chip Price

Indicative unit price (100 pcs): W5500 ≈ $2.29, ENC28J60 ≈ $3.40

Total Cost of Ownership (TCO):

External components: Lower with W5500 (often integrated magnetics) vs Higher with ENC28J60

Firmware: Faster on W5500 (built-in stack) vs Longer on ENC28J60 (manual TCP/IP, lwIP tuning)

Power: More efficient with W5500

Maintenance: Lower risk with W5500

Source: https://www.chipmall.com/blogs/w5500-vs-enc28j60_122

Recommendations by Use Case

Source: https://www.chipmall.com/blogs/w5500-vs-enc28j60_122

Alternatives to Consider

W6100: Similar to W5500, plus IPv6 support

LAN8720: PHY-only; pairs with STM32 MAC (RMII)

DM9051: SPI Ethernet with higher integration than ENC28J60; relatively easy to integrate

Conclusion

Overall winner: W5500 — strong in speed, code simplicity, price, and long-term support.

Where ENC28J60 fits — still relevant for education, 8-bit MCUs, and hobby/breadboard builds.

Recommended action — if requirements are unclear, prototype with both modules, measure, and decide. That’s engineering.