ID UV erasable PROMS used on an IBM PC board?

[Chris Elmquist]

On Tuesday (03/22/2022 at 08:09PM -0700), Glen Slick wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 12:25 PM Chris Elmquist <chrise at pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday (03/22/2022 at 12:20PM -0700), Glen Slick wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 11:56 AM Chris Elmquist <chrise at pobox.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Trying not to hijack the thread too much but I have an Intel D27C256-200
> > > > here in my TL866II+ programmer and it returns ID  89h / 8Dh.
> > > >
> > >
> > > http://www.bitsavers.org/components/intel/_dataBooks/1993_Intel_Memory_Products.pdf
> > > Page 5-78 (Page 1201 of the PDF)
> > > Table 1. Mode Selection
> > > Intelligent Identifier - Manufacturer 89H
> > > Intelligent Identifier - Device 8DH
> > > That is for the A27C256 "Automotive" rated version.
> > >
> > > My BP Microsystems BP-1610 device programmer software doesn't have an
> > > entry for that one either.
> >
> > Interesting.  Thanks Glen.  The part is clearly labeled as
> > "D27C256-200V10" so they must not have gotten around to changing the D
> > to an A :-)
> 
> (Flogging a dead horse here slightly)
> 
> Just took a look at a previous version of that Intel databook:
> http://www.bitsavers.org/components/intel/_dataBooks/1991_Intel_Memory_Products.pdf
> 
> Page 5-56 (Page 325 of the PDF) 27C256
> Table 1. Mode Selection
> Intelligent Identifier - Manufacturer 89H
> Intelligent Identifier - Device 8DH
> NOTES:
> 4. Programming equipment may also refer to this device as the 27C256A.
> Older devices may have device ID = 8CH
> 
> So apparently the Device ID change is not specific to the A27C256
> "Automotive" rated version, just that in the 1993 version of the
> databook where I first looked the only EPROMs listed are the
> "Automotive" ones.

More interesting.  If the programming algorithms remained the same then I
guess it is just an issue for the programming system--  when it auto-IDs,
it should display (and allow!) 27C256A instead of 27C256.

I guess the next question is whether the programming algorithms really
are the same between the 8CH and the 8DH variants??

My limited testing suggests they are at least compatible since my 8DH
appears to be working when programmed as an 8CH.

Chris
-- 
Chris Elmquist