Post by thread:[PIC] 16f84 replacement

www.finitesite.com/d3jsys/16F628.html Rick Allen Wayne wrote: {Quote hidden}> Hi All, > > After using a PIC16F84 for so many years, someone pointed out that there > were many replacements now available. However looking on the MP site, I was > trying to avoild having to go though vast numbers of datasheets. So does > anyone know what te modern equilivent of '84 is? I need identical pinouts, > flash programming and at least 1K ram > > Many thanks in advance > > Wayne > -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

Allen Wayne wrote: > Hi All, > >After using a PIC16F84 for so many years, someone pointed out that there >were many replacements now available. However looking on the MP site, I was >trying to avoild having to go though vast numbers of datasheets. So does >anyone know what te modern equilivent of '84 is? I need identical pinouts, >flash programming and at least 1K ram > > > Who wouldn't ;-) Try the 16F628. regards Tony -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

At 10:47 PM 3/2/2004 +0000, you wrote: > Hi All, > >After using a PIC16F84 for so many years, someone pointed out that there >were many replacements now available. However looking on the MP site, I was >trying to avoild having to go though vast numbers of datasheets. So does >anyone know what te modern equilivent of '84 is? I need identical pinouts, >flash programming and at least 1K ram There is no PIC that meets those requirements. If you actually meant "1K words of FLASH", have a look at the PIC16F627A (or 628A, 648A for more code memory etc.). Best regards, Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" spam_OUTspeffTakeThisOuTinterlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

> Hi All, > > After using a PIC16F84 for so many years, someone pointed out that there > were many replacements now available. However looking on the MP > site, I was > trying to avoild having to go though vast numbers of datasheets. So does > anyone know what te modern equilivent of '84 is? I need identical pinouts, > flash programming and at least 1K ram > > Many thanks in advance 16F88, while you can also go with the 16F628, the 16F88 is even more fully featured, so unless price is of utmost concern I'd go with the 16F88. TTYL ---------------------------------- Herbert's PIC Stuff: http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/ -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

> Is the 16F88 the same programming algorithm as the 84/84A/628 > etc., or is it > one of those new-fangled things? > > --McD It's different, but then almost all PICs are different in the specifics. Even the 84 and 628 don't have identical programming algorithms, never mind the 628A parts. Most programmers out there worth anything support the 16F88. TTYL ---------------------------------- Herbert's PIC Stuff: http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/ -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

On Tuesday, Mar 2, 2004, at 16:15 US/Pacific, Herbert Graf wrote: > 16F88, while you can also go with the 16F628, the 16F88 is even more > fully featured... Are any of the 18pin PICs NOT pin compatible? Assuming they are, the microchip web site's rather good parametric search engine says there are a total of 15 possibilities with flash, including "A" versions. The main complaint against the F84 is that it is the MOST EXPENSIVE of these; even the the 18F parts with 4k instruction words are cheaper. Microchip claims the cheapest is the 16F627; your milage may vary depending on where you buy your parts. IIRC, Digikey has the 628A priced lower than the 627 in small quantitites... BillW -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, Patrick Richards wrote: > I have done quite a bit of searching online for a free or cheap Windows > program that will allow programming of the 16F88 and haven't been able to > find anything yet. I have a KIT 96 P16PRO 40-pin Tait-style programmer. > Any suggestions? I just submitted a patch to Cygwin that would allow my Picprog-1.5 Linux programmer (uses serial port simple JDM device) to be compiled on Windows machines with Cygwin installed. Picprog supports 16F88, and now in version 1.5 it supports PIC18 family too. Picprog: http://www.iki.fi/hyvatti/pic/picprog.html Patch submission: http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2004-q1/msg00075.html I hope that it gets included soon. Jaakko -- Foreca Ltd .....Jaakko.HyvattiKILLspam@spam@foreca.com Pursimiehenkatu 29-31 B, FIN-00150 Helsinki, Finland http://www.foreca.com -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 05:59:36PM -0500, Rick C. wrote: > http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys/16F628.html Rick, Thanks for the shoutout. Here's a quick features chart. The order is my order of preference (with legend below, note this is from memory so all errors are mine): Chip PRDNAUS 16F88 432XXXX 16F819 222XX X 16F648A 422 X 16F87 432X XX 16F628A 222 X 16F181 122XX X 16F627A 122 X Legend: P: Program memory 4 - 4096 words 2 - 2048 words 1 - 1024 words R: RAM 3 - 368 bytes 2 - 224 bytes (or thereabout) D: Data memory (all 256 bytes I believe) N: nanowatt. Internal precision osciallator that runs up to 8 Mhz. Multispeed mode. Multiplelow power configurations A: Multichannel A/D converter S: Self programmable flash memory Also note that all of these parts are cheaper than the 16F84A. Since the 16F88 has everything it's my winner. BAJ {Quote hidden}> Rick > > Allen Wayne wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > After using a PIC16F84 for so many years, someone pointed out that there > > were many replacements now available. However looking on the MP site, I was > > trying to avoild having to go though vast numbers of datasheets. So does > > anyone know what te modern equilivent of '84 is? I need identical pinouts, > > flash programming and at least 1K ram > > > > Many thanks in advance > > > > Wayne > > > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: > [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 11:53:53AM +1100, Tony Nixon wrote: > John J. McDonough wrote: > > >Is the 16F88 the same programming algorithm as the 84/84A/628 etc., or is > >it > >one of those new-fangled things? > > > > > > > Different. Point of clarification. Yes it's different. However all of the 16F programming specs excluding the 16F84 are basically the same. The only differences are the block size and the write/erasure time. First off I'm presuming that a Chip Erase is going to be used. So only one erasure is required. The only fundamental difference is that for the newer chips with the larger memories you load multiple words before writing. For the 16F81X and 16F8X, it's 4 words. For the 16F87XA family it's 8. For the 16F62X and 16F87X (no A) it's 1, which lengthens the programming time BTW. It's the key difference because if you don't load all the words before programming, then you get all 1's in the unprogrammed spots. Now the 18F is a whole different ball of wax. BAJ > > regards > > Tony > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: > [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

> Point of clarification. Yes it's different. However all of > the 16F programming > specs excluding the 16F84 are basically the same. The only > differences are > the block size and the write/erasure time. I guess you did not try to make a programmer that does all 16F's (including the non-LVP ones :)? There are self-timed and explicitly-timed writes, different write-times, auto-erase writes and chips that must be erased before a write, various block sizes (as you said) and subtly different erase sequences. And I probably forgot a few differences, not to mention what uChip will invent next month. Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 08:23:47PM +0100, Wouter van Ooijen wrote: > > Point of clarification. Yes it's different. However all of > > the 16F programming > > specs excluding the 16F84 are basically the same. The only > > differences are > > the block size and the write/erasure time. > > I guess you did not try to make a programmer that does all 16F's > (including the non-LVP ones :)? I'm working through the list now, requesting samples from Mchip as I go. Priority is self programmable (16F87X[A], 16F88/87, 16F819/818) first because you can then load a bootloader into them, LVP next (for TLVP support), and the others after that. Everything but the 16F88/87 in the first group is tested. I'm still waiting on parts. > There are self-timed and > explicitly-timed writes, I choose to always issue explicitly timed writes all the time. Only will fail on 16F7X7 parts, which don't seem to have it. Will test when I finally get that 16F777 part in. However I found out that it doesn't self write, so it moves from group 1 above to group 3. > different write-times, Parameterized and selected by chip ID. > auto-erase writes and chips that must be erased before a write, I always bulk erase both program and data memories. I may run into a problem with code protection. I'll go back and regression test after I get the algorithm going for most of the chips in the family. > various block sizes (as you said) This was the big hangup. > and subtly different erase sequences. For a non code protexted chip I'm issuing a 0x09, 0x08, wait tprog, 0x17 for program and 0x0b, 0x08, wait tprog, 0x017 for data. I know that it's self timed, just being paranoid. > And I probably forgot a few > differences, not to mention what uChip will invent next month. It's crazy. It's the reason that self programmable chips with a consistent bootload is so important to me. But if I can test everything in the first group. That should give me ammo to explain to homebrewers why they are a good choice, especially with a bootloader in it. I've gotten sidetracked from working on the 16F ZPL loader because I decided it was high time for me to finalize my long abandonded PIC Designer prototype. Once I get that done and I rewire so that it uses a ICSP interface from my TLVP instead of the MAX232 Wloaded 16F877 it has now. I plan to diode wire or the two MCLR inputs (TLVP and ZPL) together so that either can wiggle the MCLR pin without affecting the other. BAJ -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics