5 Apr
2006
5 Apr
'06
7:28 a.m.
Brent Hilpert wrote:
Don Y wrote:
Ah, OK. But, IIRC, there is a very subtle difference between
the Zilog parts and the Mostek's. But, I'm sure it was in some
really obscure aspect of the device, not the obvious characteristics
(the firm I was with at the time was fond of pushing the
envelope on designs... undoc'd opcodes, subtle timing hacks
in the hardware, etc.).
<shrug> Dunno. I just remember *needing* an alternate, looking
at their (Mostek) part and deciding it wasn't quite right... :<
Chuck Guzis wrote:
Mostek's #s for the Z80 family were MK388x:
MK3880 : Z80 CPU
MK3881 : PIO
MK3882 : CTC
etc. On 4/4/2006 at 6:46 PM Don Y wrote:
No, this was a 3xxx part
number. And I am pretty sure it
was a Mostek part. I know it wasn';t a "Z80" but it was
something that grabbed our interest at the time (we were
having problems getting certain Zilog peripherals...) I don't think they are the same beasts. But,
I think they (or
something with a P/N similar to that) sticks in my mind as a
viable alternative to Z80's at one time...
Maybe you're thinking of the
Zilog "official" part numbers. The 8400 was
the CPU, the 8430, the CTC; the 8470, the DART, etc. (ref: IC Master 1982)
Presumably chosen by Mostek to be as close as possible to the MK385x, MK387x
F8 family numbers just to make the probability of confusing everyone as high
as possible.
No, *that* distinction goes to the bozos at TI with their
non-2732, 2732 (IIRC). So, if you wanted what the rest of
the world called a 2732, you had to order a 2532! (IIRC, 3
power supplies on their 2732..?)