At 02:13 PM 09/07/2009, you wrote:
>On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 20:03:02 +0800, Xiaofan wrote:
>
> >If you compare MCV14A with PIC16F526, you may find them
> >almost exactly the same (less packaging option)
> >http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/41326B.pdf
>
>When you compare the characteristic specifications the MCV14A has a few
>that are looser and has no FLASH endurance specification.
>
>IMO they are functional reject PICs or 'toy' parts. Is the term 'toy' still
>used?
>
>I don't really see customer testing the parts, Microchip already tested
>them to reject them (unless maybe they reject whole wafers but would they
>package any untested die?).

The customer will test a complete module or complete product with the part
installed, meaning if the micro fails at, say, temperatures above  63=B0C
at maximum clock speed, so might the product (or perhaps not because the
designer has chosen a more conservative clock speed).

I doubt that these are 'rejects', merely not tested as thoroughly or to
as high standards (for use in consumer gadgets, toys and other disposable
stuff where a 1% overall failure rate is not fatal).

>Best regards,

Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..."            "The Journey is the rewar=
d"
speff@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com




-- =

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