6502.org Forum  Projects  Code  Documents  Tools  Forum
It is currently Sun Nov 10, 2024 8:39 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2016 3:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 2:14 am
Posts: 78
Location: Irkutsk, Russia
Hello everyone!
My name is Vladimir. Sorry for my english, but 'as is'... :)
My job is not related to computers and IT, this is something like a hobby.
I have some small experience with 8080 and Z80. Recently, the 6502 kingdom attracts me increasingly and I started to get everything related to 6502.
But, closer to the point. I got hold a 65c22 chip, but neither datasheet nor chip marking can help me to figure out the frequency range of device.
The marking appears as follows:

R65C22P
11450-12
MEXICO
1423 B55534-2

What does it mean?
Thanks.


Last edited by Vladimir on Wed Jul 20, 2016 3:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2016 3:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 1:09 am
Posts: 8539
Location: Southern California
Welcome.

Strange. I've never seen them without a numeral after the "P" to tell the number of MHz, for example R65C22P4.

_________________
http://WilsonMinesCo.com/ lots of 6502 resources
The "second front page" is http://wilsonminesco.com/links.html .
What's an additional VIA among friends, anyhow?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2016 4:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 2:14 am
Posts: 78
Location: Irkutsk, Russia
There is an inscription on the back side (bottom) too:

748 K494R
3013A1000
MEXICO R


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2016 9:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:38 pm
Posts: 589
Location: Michigan, USA
Isn't that designation used for 1-MHz parts like the R6522P pictured below?


Attachments:
R65C22P.png
R65C22P.png [ 313.44 KiB | Viewed 1350 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2016 1:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:46 pm
Posts: 8481
Location: Midwestern USA
GARTHWILSON wrote:
Welcome.

Strange. I've never seen them without a numeral after the "P" to tell the number of MHz, for example R65C22P4.

My old dinosaur brain seems to be telling me that the absence of a speed designator means it's a 1 MHz part.

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2016 1:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 2:14 am
Posts: 78
Location: Irkutsk, Russia
To Michael: Maybe. But, how did you know that it is 1 MHz? Your marking tells me nothing...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 8:29 am
Posts: 597
Location: Norway/Japan
IIRC the first versions of the parts were all 1MHz. So no special speed designation was necessary. When the faster parts became available it became necessary to add the number, e.g. P2, P4 etc. And 1MHz parts produced after that point would be P1. You'll sometimes see the same thing happening in various other fields, not just for chips.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 4:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 2:14 am
Posts: 78
Location: Irkutsk, Russia
Tor wrote:
IIRC the first versions of the parts were all 1MHz. So no special speed designation was necessary. When the faster parts became available it became necessary to add the number, e.g. P2, P4 etc. And 1MHz parts produced after that point would be P1. You'll sometimes see the same thing happening in various other fields, not just for chips.

Maybe, firstly no special speed designation was nesessary. And finally, improving technologies should lead to the same situation, no need for designators. Say, sorting chips based on their operating speed performance results success rate 99 percent, all the chips are 4 MHz or faster. Is this possible? Notice, the date of my chips is 1423.
2014, two years ago.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 9:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 8:55 am
Posts: 996
Location: Berkshire, UK
I think it's a P1 part and the digit has wrapped round to the next line where it's followed by the date code for the packaging process (1450) which is was around six months after the silicon was made (1423).

The logo limits the length of the first three text lines. Look at the 6522 photo.

_________________
Andrew Jacobs
6502 & PIC Stuff - http://www.obelisk.me.uk/
Cross-Platform 6502/65C02/65816 Macro Assembler - http://www.obelisk.me.uk/dev65/
Open Source Projects - https://github.com/andrew-jacobs


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 3:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 2:14 am
Posts: 78
Location: Irkutsk, Russia
BitWise wrote:
I think it's a P1 part and the digit has wrapped round to the next line where it's followed by the date code for the packaging process (1450) which is was around six months after the silicon was made (1423).

The logo limits the length of the first three text lines. Look at the 6522 photo.


I have no other 65c22 for comparison, but there is four R65C51P2.
An analysis of their marking does not confirm your guess.
The marking is as follows:

1-st:
R65C51P2
11470-14
MEXICO
9237 A23618-4

2-nd:
R65C51P2
11470-14
MEXICO
9415 A37995-3

3-rd:
R65C51P2
11470-14
MEXICO
9525 S10102-2

4-th:
R65C51P2
11470-14
PHILIPPINES
9649 B25846.2

The line 11470-14 is an essential own of this chip. This is not a date.
Apparently , it is necessary to perform an experiment, to test frequency characteristics of my 65C22.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: John West, W3C [Validator] and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: