Best OTP version simular to PIC16F84A20P?

Started by sirtiffguy September 1, 2004
I just finsihed (phew) my program on the PIC16F84A and want to
duplicate and reproduce it for a final version. I am looking at
digikey's list of chips, trying to figure out which one I could go
with that would be least expensive. Any suggestions? I was
thinking of the PIC16C54C (3.12, compared to 8.14 CAN$$).



> I just finsihed (phew) my program on the PIC16F84A and want to
> duplicate and reproduce it for a final version. I am looking at
> digikey's list of chips, trying to figure out which one I could go
> with that would be least expensive. Any suggestions? I was
> thinking of the PIC16C54C (3.12, compared to 8.14 CAN$$).

Forget OTP. Even when you'd want a 16C54 (isn't that a 12-bit core?) you
should choose a 16F54 instead. But within the falsh chips the 16F628A
would be a first guess, or check the 16F630 if you can live with less
I/O pins.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products



> > Forget OTP.
>
> Not entirely true. (snip)

I agree to that only when you look wider than just PICs. Within PICs the
price difference between OTP and FLASH is minimal, and if I judge
Microchips' policy right the difference will turn around in the next few
years.

When you realy want the lowest cost-per-unit you should consider what I
call the 'deep-chinese' microcontrollers that are badly documented, a
pain-in-the-ass to program, available in factory-programmed version
only, but cost only a few cents (provided, of course, that you will
buy*at lot* of them!).

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products



On Sun, 5 Sep 2004, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:

> > I just finsihed (phew) my program on the PIC16F84A and want to
> > duplicate and reproduce it for a final version. I am looking at
> > digikey's list of chips, trying to figure out which one I could go
> > with that would be least expensive. Any suggestions? I was
> > thinking of the PIC16C54C (3.12, compared to 8.14 CAN$$).
>
> Forget OTP.

Not entirely true. I have on my desc spared in pieces a bar code reader.
It use a 0.20USD 8bit OTP microcontroler. Not a PIC.
If you really want to earn something from your product, then you must plan
a mass production (with a market polling before!).
For a mass production use the cheapest, which is either OTP
either ROM factory programmed.

If just duplicate and not multiplicate, forgot everything above.

Vasile
http://surducan.netfirms.com

Even when you'd want a 16C54 (isn't that a 12-bit core?) you
> should choose a 16F54 instead. But within the falsh chips the 16F628A
> would be a first guess, or check the 16F630 if you can live with less
> I/O pins.
>
> Wouter van Ooijen
>
> -- -------
> Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
> consultancy, development, PICmicro products > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the instructions
> Yahoo! Groups Links





On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:

> > > Forget OTP.
> >
> > Not entirely true. (snip)
>
> I agree to that only when you look wider than just PICs. Within PICs the
> price difference between OTP and FLASH is minimal, and if I judge
> Microchips' policy right the difference will turn around in the next few
> years.
>
> When you realy want the lowest cost-per-unit you should consider what I
> call the 'deep-chinese' microcontrollers that are badly documented, a
> pain-in-the-ass to program, available in factory-programmed version
> only, but cost only a few cents (provided, of course, that you will
> buy*at lot* of them!).
>
There is a good solution for the quatity problem. Buy 1000, it's the
minimum you could buy in China, through away 900 and sent the rest to
Netherland. It's the common way that small buyers do. Will be anyway 80%
cheaper than with any PIC.
96% from the world electronic production (including everything means
electronics) is China. Taiwan is just the office.

Vasile





> There is a good solution for the quatity problem. Buy 1000, it's the
> minimum you could buy in China, through away 900 and sent the rest to
> Netherland. It's the common way that small buyers do. Will be
> anyway 80%
> cheaper than with any PIC.

But I was talking about factory-mask-programmed uC's, which won't be
very usefull for other peopele :(

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products




On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:

>
> > There is a good solution for the quatity problem. Buy 1000, it's the
> > minimum you could buy in China, through away 900 and sent the rest to
> > Netherland. It's the common way that small buyers do. Will be
> > anyway 80%
> > cheaper than with any PIC.
>
> But I was talking about factory-mask-programmed uC's, which won't be
> very usefull for other peopele :(


Philosophically speacking, nor the flash part aren't too usefull... We
live in a crazy consumer society (created and developed by the
occidental world). I didn't believe that electronics will not worth much
more than knocking nails on the wall. At least this is what is happening
here. Else how could find any kind of electronic consumer bulshits, below
1 euro. Example: only chinese are able to built working hair driers or
scanning radio receivers below 0.2..0.3 euro/ pcs (production price).

Vasile



--- In , "Wouter van Ooijen" <wouter@v...>
> When you realy want the lowest cost-per-unit you should consider what I
> call the 'deep-chinese' microcontrollers that are badly documented, a
> pain-in-the-ass to program, available in factory-programmed version
> only, but cost only a few cents (provided, of course, that you will
> buy*at lot* of them!).

Just be prepared for piracy of your product -- it's a real
possibility. There might be an "accidental" overrun which you are
never told about and those chips end up in hands of another
manufacturer in China. Suddenly pirated copies of your product end up
being sold in Hong Kong and Malaysia. I'm not saying it will happen
but sometimes it does.


> I just finsihed (phew) my program on the PIC16F84A and want to
> duplicate and reproduce it for a final version. I am looking at
> digikey's list of chips, trying to figure out which one I could go
> with that would be least expensive. Any suggestions? I was
> thinking of the PIC16C54C (3.12, compared to 8.14 CAN$$).

First, you need to be careful about that code you wrote. It might be
incompatible with 16C54. Make sure to check code compatibility before
programming C54.

Second, Microchip has very nice comparison tables for its MCUs including
prices so you might want to visit their web site and to check those tables.

Finally, I don't know details about your application (large volume I guess)
but OTP devices are very tricky. Once you program them, there's no way to
change it. So, having Flash MCU might be very useful if some kind of
bootloader exists. If anything goes wrong you can correct it by uploading
new firmware. ICSP can be used same way.

Regards,
Igor


At 06:49 PM 9/1/2004, sirtiffguy wrote:
>I just finsihed (phew) my program on the PIC16F84A and want to
>duplicate and reproduce it for a final version. I am looking at
>digikey's list of chips, trying to figure out which one I could go
>with that would be least expensive. Any suggestions? I was
>thinking of the PIC16C54C (3.12, compared to 8.14 CAN$$).

How many pins to you actually need? Do you need to be able to change the
program at some later date? Are you currently using any of the eeprom in
the '84A? How much of the program space are you currently using? How much
RAM?

There are many options - some of which may require a substantial re-write
of your program to fit the smaller device. But the cheapest PIC is well
under a dollar US in moderate quantities. Or you could even look outside
the PIC family - you can purchase Atmel Tiny11 8-pin parts for about $ US 0.25.

In other words, more information is required.

dwayne

--
Dwayne Reid <>
Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd Edmonton, AB, CANADA
(780) 489-3199 voice (780) 487-6397 fax

Celebrating 20 years of Engineering Innovation (1984 - 2004)
.-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-
`-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-'
Do NOT send unsolicited commercial email to this email address.
This message neither grants consent to receive unsolicited
commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial email.