Mike Harrison wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 16:30:43 -0600, you wrote:
>
>   
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:piclist-bounces@mit.edu] On
>>> Behalf Of Bob Blick
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2008 2:51 PM
>>> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
>>> Subject: Re: [PIC] Cheapest uC with a UART?
>>>
>>> Matthew Mucker wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Is there a cheaper part out there? Perhaps a non-Microchip part?  (Of
>>>> course, the internal oscillator on the 16F688 does save cost on an
>>>>         
>>> external
>>>       
>>>> crystal...)
>>>>         
>>> Bit-banging is always an alternative of your baud rate is ~4800 or
>>> less.
>>>
>>> Are you happy with the internal oscillator when using the UART? Once I
>>> almost went that way, but I was only sending one byte at a time, and I
>>> only cared about 6 bits of it so I could use just the first 6. But I
>>> chickened out and added a resonator. Most of my stuff has to work -20
>>> to
>>> +50 C so I tend to be skeptical of RC and internal oscillators.
>>>
>>> If you are in charge of both ends maybe you can do something that syncs
>>> to each bit. Then you wouldn't need a uart at all.
>>>
>>> Cheerful regards,
>>>
>>> Bob
>>>       
>> I want to send lots of data at >500 kbaud. 
>>     
>
> Bear in mind that UARTS usually need a 16xbaudrate  clock, so internal oscs are  
> less likely to be useful at the high end. 
>
> Cypress do some 8-pin psoc parts with HW UART - no idea how cost compares tough. 
> ATMEGA48 is very good value peripheral-wise. 
>
>
>
>
>   
I did a DMX512 Theatrical Controller at 250Kb years ago with PIC16C73 at 
20M, so 500Kb should be possible
with a 40M PIC. Not much loop time, though...

--Bob

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist