3.4 Power Consumption Comparison

Table 3-1. Measured Power Consumption — Ambient Light Sensor Application
Implementation	Average Current	Reduction vs. Active Mode	Notes
Active mode	~6.18 mA	Baseline	CPU active at 24 MHz continuously; no idle savings
Standby + Interrupts	~1.08 mA	~82.5% reduction	CPU wakes every 100 ms to process each sample
SleepWalking — Below Threshold	~9.91 µA	~99.8% reduction	Peripherals sample autonomously; CPU remains in Standby
SleepWalking — Above Threshold (with UART)	~159 µA	~97.4% reduction	Includes CPU wake events for UART transmission
SleepWalking — Deep Standby (between wakes)	~2.39 µA	~99.96% reduction	True Standby baseline between 100 ms sampling cycles

Note: All measurements were taken using the Atmel Power Debugger and captured with the MPLAB Data Visualizer. Average current values represent time-averaged results over the measurement window shown in each of the previous figures.

Note: Measurements taken using the PIC32CM PL10 Curiosity Nano at VDDIO = AVDD = 3.3V. The Deep Standby value represents a 78.7 ms capture window isolated between two successive CPU wake-up events, reflecting the true hardware Standby baseline between 100 ms sampling cycles.

The measured results demonstrate the transformative impact of SleepWalking on system power consumption. Moving from Active mode to Standby with Interrupts reduces average current by approximately 82.5%, while SleepWalking under normal operating conditions (below threshold) achieves a 99.8% reduction. The deep Standby baseline of just 2.39 µA between sampling events confirms that the hardware SleepWalking architecture eliminates nearly all unnecessary current draw during idle intervals. For battery-powered applications, this progression translates directly into dramatically extended operational life.