UART vs SPI vs I2C: Which Protocol Should You Actually Use?

UART / SPI / I²C side‑by‑side wiring overview

If you've ever stared at a microcontroller datasheet wondering whether to use UART, SPI, or I2C for your next project, you're not alone. These three serial communication protocols are the backbone of embedded systems, but choosing the wrong one can lead to headaches down the road.

As engineers, we've all been there - debugging a sluggish I2C bus at 3 AM or wondering why our SPI sensor isn't responding. The truth is, each protocol has its sweet spot, and understanding when to use which one can save you countless hours of troubleshooting.

The Serial Communication Landscape

Before diving into the comparison, let's understand why serial protocols matter. In embedded development, components need to talk to each other - microcontrollers to sensors, processors to memory, displays to controllers. Serial communication allows this data exchange using fewer wires than parallel interfaces, reducing PCB complexity and cost.

Quick Protocol Overview

UART (Universal Asynchronous Receiver-Transmitter)

• The Simple One: Point-to-point communication

• Wires: 2-3 (TX, RX, optional GND)

• Speed: Typically 9600 to 115200 baud, up to 1 Mbps

• Addressing: None - direct connection only

SPI (Serial Peripheral Interface)

• The Speed Demon: High-speed, full-duplex communication

• Wires: 4+ (MOSI, MISO, SCLK, CS per slave)

• Speed: 10+ MHz common, can exceed 100 MHz

• Addressing: Chip select lines for each slave

I2C (Inter-Integrated Circuit)

• The Bus Master: Multi-device shared bus

• Wires: 2 (SDA, SCL) plus power and ground

• Speed: 100 kHz (standard), 400 kHz (fast), 1 MHz (fast+)

• Addressing: 7-bit or 10-bit device addresses

Head‑to‑Head Comparison

Head‑to‑Head Comparison of Serial Protocols

Feature	UART	SPI	I2C
Speed	Moderate (up to 1 Mbps)	Fast (10–100+ MHz)	Slow to Moderate (100 kHz–1 MHz)
Wires	2–3	4+ (scales with slaves)	2
Complexity	Simple	Moderate	Moderate
Multi‑device	No	Yes (with CS lines)	Yes (shared bus)
Error Detection	Optional parity	None built‑in	ACK/NACK
Power	Low	Moderate	Low
Range	Short to medium	Short	Short

When to Use Each Protocol

Choose UART When:

• Debugging and development: Serial monitors, console output

• Simple point-to-point communication: GPS modules, Bluetooth modules

• Human-readable data: AT commands, text-based protocols

• Legacy compatibility: Many older devices still use UART

Real-world example: Connecting a GPS module to your microcontroller for location data. The GPS sends NMEA sentences over UART - simple, reliable, and easy to parse.

Minimal point‑to‑point block diagram for UART.

Choose SPI When:

• High-speed data transfer: SD cards, flash memory, high-resolution displays

• Real-time applications: ADCs, DACs where timing matters

• Deterministic timing: No clock stretching or arbitration delays

• Simple master-slave relationships: Clear hierarchy needed

Real-world example: Reading data from a high-speed accelerometer for a drone's flight controller. SPI's speed and deterministic timing ensure your control loop gets fresh data every cycle.

Multi‑slave SPI daisy chain. Highlights the extra chip‑select lines and full‑duplex paths.

Choose I2C When:

• Multiple sensors on one bus: Temperature, humidity, pressure sensors

• Limited GPIO pins: Microcontrollers with few available pins

• Standard peripherals: EEPROMs, RTCs, I/O expanders

• Modular systems: Easy to add/remove devices

Real-world example: A smart home sensor node with temperature, humidity, light, and motion sensors. All can share the same I2C bus with unique addresses, saving precious GPIO pins.

Master‑multi‑slave bus with pull‑ups

Common Gotchas to Avoid

UART Pitfalls:

• Baud rate mismatches: Both sides must agree on speed

• No flow control: Data can be lost if receiver is busy

• Ground loops: Always connect grounds in longer connections

SPI Gotchas:

• No addressing: Each slave needs its own chip select line

• Clock polarity/phase: CPOL and CPHA must match between master and slave

• No error detection: You won't know if data was corrupted

I2C Traps:

• Clock stretching: Slaves can slow down the bus unexpectedly

• Address conflicts: Two devices can't share the same address

• Pull-up resistors: Required but often forgotten or wrong value

• Bus capacitance: Long wires or many devices can cause signal integrity issues

Real-World Design Decisions

Let's look at how these protocols might be used in a typical IoT device:

---

Sensor hub topology: one MCU talks I²C to sensing and time-keeping chips, SPI to an SD card, and UART to a Wi-Fi module.

Smart Environmental Monitor:

• I2C: Temperature/humidity sensor, RTC, EEPROM (shared bus, standard parts)

• SPI: SD card for data logging (high speed for large files)

• UART: WiFi module communication (AT commands, simple interface)

Industrial Data Logger:

• SPI: Multiple high-speed ADCs (deterministic timing critical)

• I2C: Configuration EEPROM, status LEDs via I/O expander

• UART: Debug console, optional cellular modem

Industrial data-logger bus layout: SPI for fast ADCs, I²C for housekeeping, UART for debug and cellular back-haul.

Making the Right Choice

When deciding between protocols, ask yourself:

1. How fast does my data need to be? SPI for speed, I2C for moderate, UART for simple.

2. How many devices do I need to connect? I2C excels at multi-device, SPI needs more pins, UART is point-to-point only.

3. How many GPIO pins can I spare? I2C uses fewest, SPI scales with device count.

4. Do I need error detection? I2C has built-in ACK/NACK, others require additional layers.

5. What's my power budget? All three are relatively low power, but I2C and UART edge out SPI.

The Bottom Line

There's no "best" protocol - only the right tool for your specific job. UART excels at simplicity and debugging, SPI dominates when speed matters, and I2C shines for multi-device systems with limited pins.

The key is understanding your project's requirements and constraints. Need to connect five sensors with minimal wiring? I2C is your friend. Building a high-speed data acquisition system? SPI is the way to go. Just need simple, reliable communication? UART has been solving that problem for decades.

Remember, you're not limited to just one protocol per project. The best embedded systems often use all three, each handling the tasks they're optimized for.

What's your go-to protocol for embedded projects? Have you run into any interesting challenges with UART, SPI, or I2C? I'd love to hear about your experiences in the comments below.