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 0620ACFC0 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 00:05:48 +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 o6MDvELI009652; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:57:17 -0400 Received: from mailhub-dmz-3.mit.edu (MAILHUB-DMZ-3.MIT.EDU [18.9.21.42]) by pch.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.8) with ESMTP id o6MDvCbW009640 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:57:12 -0400 Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu (DMZ-MAILSEC-SCANNER-2.MIT.EDU [18.9.25.13]) by mailhub-dmz-3.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id o6MDux5P024103 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:57:12 -0400 X-AuditID: 1209190d-b7c82ae000000a16-d3-4c484e3a1861 Received: from mail-pw0-f49.google.com (mail-pw0-f49.google.com [209.85.160.49]) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu (Symantec Brightmail Gateway) with SMTP id 73.E9.02582.A3E484C4; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:57:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pwj7 with SMTP id 7so3837694pwj.36 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 06:57:11 -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=E8KSzV4gN5SXi3dI081jkWOPWQOvCubgyDdlfrJyb1s=; b=CeIDA3Ayt4rb78xe/NlXWZ4UWV2ykXoi4RLka5IEX7HuMPeE6K+sZsvLkH8qoPKSXJ 8dut/9OJ1KGBYfo35hmjTT3Q+ZmXoHZWXVMpvYHSpeJDzXaOvFUnYF8zCVRXtmjBtrB5 Q5a6nH+9oxdadPaEd+Bi2+pU2xbEK9A0Ocgpg= 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=cir0T1BS6ZdJ1kkRFTH4MwVPE4MC5pqyOQ09vm0nVoMWja+hgoUwdDPaw3BdMcCIWU itrEkowEqpIwFui1mtpPrtTvZonKv/KuXSrDFBqYnpoxkJjkxF7y3yVmaUIY4di7Tds2 /081aQsw4FcakyroayPmjtWXjlKcynv9s2hL4= Received: by 10.142.229.13 with SMTP id b13mr2275594wfh.349.1279807016695; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 06:56:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.161.20 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 06:56:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <04652DE344924B58907CC65C3A63873A@ivp3ghz> References: <015901cb2991$46b98070$0300a8c0@main> <04652DE344924B58907CC65C3A63873A@ivp3ghz> From: RussellMc Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 01:56:26 +1200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [OT] Running a PIC near it's maximum rated frequency To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAxVGFDQVRhTyFUbSIQ== X-Topics: [OT] 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 > Was he ? I thought he just wanted to go faster than guaranteed spec.... Sirra, methinks thou doeth him an injustice. Your bowmanship and strength of arm may yet exceed myne own. I will not here proclaim upon the relative merits of our eyes and brains in winnowing out the wheat from midst the chaff. To whit. > The dsPIC is rated to run at a maximum of 40 MIPS > on 3 V - 3.3 V. Would running it with a 40 MHz crystal oscillator be > safe? As in, would it be reliable to run the dsPIC at it's maximum > rated frequency? does only barely, if it doth at all, allow of the interpretation that thou hast deigned to bestow upon it. Think you not so? The phrases "...with a 40...", and "... at its maximum" rather suggest, it seems to me, the intent to find an acceptable limit, but not exceed it. No? Still in [OT] :-) R back to work ... :-) -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist