Post by thread:Direct replacement for 16F84

Hello comrads, I was wondering if any of you could quickly answer a question for me; is there a direct replacement for the 16F84? Excluding the EEPROM of course. From what I k now the 16C54 and the 16C56 look promising. Am I wrong? Thanks in advance! BEST Regards, Steven ******************************************************************************* Steven Kosmerchock Engineering Technician CELWAVE Phx Az USA email: spam_OUTsteve.kosmerchockTakeThisOuTcelwave.com ******************************************************************************* www.geocities.com/researchtriangle/lab/6584 *******************************************************************************

You can also check out the 16C61 Calvin -----Original Message----- From: Steven Kosmerchock <.....Steve.KosmerchockKILLspam@spam@CELWAVE.COM> To: PICLISTKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU <.....PICLISTKILLspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU> Date: Martes 26 de Mayo de 1998 11:57 AM Subject: Direct replacement for 16F84 >Hello comrads, > >I was wondering if any of you could quickly answer a question for me; is there a direct replacement for the 16F84? Excluding the EEPROM of course. >From what I know the 16C54 and the 16C56 look promising. Am I wrong? Thanks in advance! > >BEST Regards, >Steven > >*************************************************************************** **** >Steven Kosmerchock >Engineering Technician >CELWAVE >Phx Az USA >email: EraseMEsteve.kosmerchockspam_OUTTakeThisOuTcelwave.com >*************************************************************************** **** >www.geocities.com/researchtriangle/lab/6584 >*************************************************************************** **** >

> I was wondering if any of you could quickly answer a question for me; is there a direct replacement for the 16F84? Excluding the EEPROM of course. From what I know the 16C54 and the 16C56 look promising. Am I wrong? Thanks in advance! The 16C54 and 56 are baseline devices, with a different instruction set to the 16F84. The only other devices that have the same ROM/RAM configuration are the 16CR84, which is only a masked device, I believe, and the 16C711. The 16C711 should be fine, but you will need to disable the analog inputs. It really depends on what you need - there are plenty of 18 pin chips, but they have differing ROM/RAM sizes. If you can get away with less RAM or ROM, then oth er chips become possibilities. Regards, Clyde -- Clyde Smith-Stubbs | HI-TECH Software Email: clydespam_OUThtsoft.com | Phone Fax WWW: http://www.htsoft.com/ | USA: (408) 490 2885 (408) 490 2885 PGP: finger @spam@clydeKILLspamhtsoft.com | AUS: +61 7 3354 2411 +61 7 3354 2422 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- HI-TECH C: compiling the real world.

We use the 16c61, 16c711, 16c621, 16c622. The last 2 parts have hardware comparitors that you have to disable but have MUCH more RAM and code space than an '84. They are also cheaper. The 16c5x parts are cheaper still but differ significantly. You may have to re-write some or all of your code work with them. >I was wondering if any of you could quickly answer a question for me; is there >a direct replacement for the 16F84? Excluding the EEPROM of course. >From what I >know the 16C54 and the 16C56 look promising. Am I wrong? Thanks in advance! dwayne Dwayne Reid <KILLspamdwaynerKILLspamplanet.eon.net> Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd Edmonton, Alberta, CANADA (403) 489-3199 voice (403) 487-6397 fax

I guess you need the 16C556; it should be strictly compatible excluding EEPROM, but has more RAM ;-) In my country, the OTP version is only slightly cheaper than the F84 so I would hesitate to replace (F84 is fine. I plan in all my applications with F84 the ISP connector so I don't need to remove the IC when reprogram [even not to dispose it as with OTP] ). Imre On Tue, 26 May 1998, Steven Kosmerchock wrote: > Hello comrads, > > I was wondering if any of you could quickly answer a question for me; is there a direct replacement for the 16F84? Excluding the EEPROM of course. From what I know the 16C54 and the 16C56 look promising. Am I wrong? Thanks in advance! {Quote hidden}> > BEST Regards, > Steven > > ****************************************************************************** * > Steven Kosmerchock > Engineering Technician > CELWAVE > Phx Az USA > email: RemoveMEsteve.kosmerchockTakeThisOuTcelwave.com > ****************************************************************************** * > www.geocities.com/researchtriangle/lab/6584 > ****************************************************************************** * > >