gnupic: fate of 18F0x0 chips?


Previous by date: 26 Mar 2002 17:05:16 -0000 Re: fate of 18F0x0 chips?, Eric Smith
Next by date: 26 Mar 2002 17:05:16 -0000 use of labels in macros in gpasm - howto and maybe bug?, Jesse Lackey
Previous in thread: 26 Mar 2002 17:05:16 -0000 Re: fate of 18F0x0 chips?, Eric Smith
Next in thread:

Subject: Re: fate of 18F0x0 chips?
From: Eliahu Friedmann ####@####.####
Date: 26 Mar 2002 17:05:16 -0000
Message-Id: <3CA0A889.1E0DD1F9@netvision.net.il>

I believe that when you speak about low cost AND low power, CMOS is the only
technology.  At PICs the low cost is the #1 factor...

Regards,

Eli Friedmann

Eric Smith wrote:

> > The fact remains that for any chip, if you increase the clock rate you
> > increase power consumption.
>
> I'll agree that it's true for most chips, and even for most common chips,
> but certainly not for all chips.  There are IC processes out there other
> than CMOS, and some of them have very different behavior with
> respect to frequency and power consumption, e.g., ECL.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
> For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####





Previous by date: 26 Mar 2002 17:05:16 -0000 Re: fate of 18F0x0 chips?, Eric Smith
Next by date: 26 Mar 2002 17:05:16 -0000 use of labels in macros in gpasm - howto and maybe bug?, Jesse Lackey
Previous in thread: 26 Mar 2002 17:05:16 -0000 Re: fate of 18F0x0 chips?, Eric Smith
Next in thread:


Powered by ezmlm-browse 0.20.