Well lots of us work with sram because its easy to work with and can cut down on development.

Ok so I've just looked at drams because I found this circuit that uses drams, which was invented and released first sram or drams?!

Any reason then why a device made in 1983 would use a number of drams instead of sram???? cheaper? what!

talking a device that has a processor at 1 to 2 Mhz.. hmm

is there a list of advantages and disadvantages that have to be considered?

help!

_________________
NPastoll

http://xtronics.com/memory/how_memory-works.htm
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/se ... .Cs.r.html

thease web addys appear to support the claim that dram's are indead are cheaper than sram but are slower! I would say depending on where you are things are kinda different now, drams still cheap but sram is much cheaper than it use to be, just like anything..

unless someone has somthing they would like to add I think?? I have answered myself.

_________________
NPastoll

These websites, despite a few inaccuracies, give the general idea. For 6502 work however, there's hardly any point in using DRAM anymore. SRAMs up to half a megabyte (512Kx8) are easily available for around $10US in single-piece quantities. They give a relatively fast, single-chip solution with no address multiplexing or refresh requirements, and operate on very low power. The first time I built a computer using CMOS in the mid-80's, I had a 10uF capacitor across the 8Kx8 SRAM's power, and was pleasantly surprised to find, after pulling the battery off at the end of the day, that all the data I had stored in my experimenting was still there the next day, held only by the capacitor.

SRAMs do seem to be very low power. Some Nintendo cartridges starting back in 1987 were using 8Kx8 SRAMs with batteries, and the majority of those batteries still work.