Delivered-To: jake@vapourforge.com Received: from pch.mit.edu (PCH.MIT.EDU [18.7.21.90]) by mail.vapourforge.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9889DCFC0 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:10:23 +1000 (EST) Received: from pch.mit.edu (pch.mit.edu [127.0.0.1]) by pch.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.8) with ESMTP id o6MC2Fsh015756; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:02:24 -0400 Received: from mailhub-dmz-4.mit.edu (MAILHUB-DMZ-4.MIT.EDU [18.7.62.38]) by pch.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.8) with ESMTP id o6MC2DIo015691 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:02:13 -0400 Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-3.mit.edu (DMZ-MAILSEC-SCANNER-3.MIT.EDU [18.9.25.14]) by mailhub-dmz-4.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id o6MC1lFu026992 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:02:13 -0400 X-AuditID: 1209190e-b7bbeae000000a09-76-4c483347cf3b Received: from mail-pw0-f49.google.com (mail-pw0-f49.google.com [209.85.160.49]) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-3.mit.edu (Symantec Brightmail Gateway) with SMTP id FC.69.02569.743384C4; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:02:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pwj7 with SMTP id 7so3793408pwj.36 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 05:02:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=8mPRsP63G7RY/fM4hwbQtwt2BKiDlkSbDQmYYg4HXT0=; b=RIyQCRkgkDtipionJJH7m7jZimZku5Vobd/cvoD0FKTi/NjwrQOO7ipRzOZ6UElspo TKBqgpNP2m2YDUSi0sBp6BoavzrNzPlNdnIuD/MyoNJqdXyERwb1JAgsESLIe8zy5BqJ oqr0pHZjlhXzHxMVaorOOriGebNNnyyh10Z4Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; b=h4JikpYTPgio4VuOhqhYzyP9Itvp0kuF+lrjigpDG8xLsTjuMT03vIOE9gKj/pm+2G uI9HgXLKe2rxYdUW6yOMwh/Jgf0MJWPqu3aYYKl2RFSZewQfgD2p/Hp2yO3NV7r3yZME S1EpX3OnNbfFdvqjosWwHiBRMBQB3alnl8jbo= Received: by 10.142.127.9 with SMTP id z9mr2132154wfc.193.1279800132549; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 05:02:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.161.20 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 05:01:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: RussellMc Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 00:01:42 +1200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PIC] Running a PIC near it's maximum rated frequency To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAhVGFPIVRtIh X-Topics: [PIC] X-BeenThere: piclist@mit.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6 Precedence: list Reply-To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." List-Id: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: piclist-bounces@mit.edu Errors-To: piclist-bounces@mit.edu > Also, the data sheet doesn't say anything about a max 64 MHz clock > source for the main oscillator. It doesn't. But if you read my prior post (after this one of yours that I'm replying to here) you'll see that it DOES say something about a 40 MHz limit for the main oscillator. > It only says that for the axillary > clock source for peripherals. So I'm guessing I could use an 80 MHz > crystal oscillator if I wanted. Are you trolling for a rise from Olin? Seems to be working :-) ie reading about what it says about the specific signal of interest "is wise" [tm]. Find the signal name (here "EC" and also "external clock") and search the data sheet for numeric values. About 99.14159265358979% of all data sheets will specify such things. Some few fail to. This one doesn't (fail to). Russell -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist