From: "Nigel Goodwin" > writes > >>< From: "Jim Robertson" > >> BTW. Why isn't anyone calling the 24C, 25C 93C eeproms - "flash?" > >Atmel seem to know the difference, they list both Serial EEPROM memory and > >Serial FLASH devices. > Don't Atmel list the AVR processors as 'Flash' when they actually use > EEPROM technology?. I'm not sure, I don't use their processors, but their serial memory does seem to be correctly identified. > >The EEPROMs are in sizes <= 1MBit and Flash starts at 1MBit up to 32MBit. > >Flash devices are available in page sizes from 256 to 1024 bits. > > Is that the main difference between Flash and EEPROM, Flash is used for > large chips, and EEPROM for small?. No, no. That was your free bonus information. Comparison shopping etc. I'm pretty sure the main visible difference is as JimR and others mentioned, in EEPROM bits may be individually erased, in Flash erasure is done a page at a time. I believe this is due to Flash's roots in EPROM technology where an entire chip is erased at once. Time was when EEPROM was unbeliveably expensive for any significant size of storage and Flash seemed like a useable compromise between function and cost. The difference in size ranges is no doubt due to likely use, for a small data storage element you wouldn't want to have to erase large chunks of of the device every time a small amount of data changed, hence flash may be more suitable for bulk data applications. . -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! use mailto:listserv@mitvma.mit.edu?body=SET%20PICList%20DIGEST