Dan Michaels email (remove spam text)
Roman Black wrote:
History repeats itself - I remember this "exact" same discussion from
about 8 or 9 months ago :).
You are both right - in your "statements" at least. However:
1 - the "text" in front of the datasheets regarding Timer0 is the same
for all the PICs --> Roman's 10ns.
2 - but the info given in the Electrical Characteristics "tables" in the
back is different in some cases --> 16C/F84s show 30 and 20ns, as
3 - for other processors - ie, NON-Flash - the number given is 10 ns in
both text and tables.
I checked this in both the 1995 databook and more recent datasheets.
Obviously, Mchp simply took the same original day-1 datasheet and cloned
it for later processors - they changed the tables in the back to reflect
different processors, but didn't always catch/update all the references
in the text in the front.
My guess is the tables in the back are more correct - so you should
get 50 Mhz out of a non-Flash part, and only 20 mhz out of a flash
part. But who really knows?
You could try asking an Mchp app engineer to come up with a definitive
answer, but ...........
hope this helps [ha],
- dan michaels
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
See also: www.piclist.com/techref/microchip/time.htm?key=count
You must be a member of the
piclist mailing list
(not only a www.piclist.com member) to post to the