On 09/04/2011 07:40 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > >> The power comsumption on +12V helps explain why the 6569 runs so hot. > > 400mW... That's not _that_ much is it? You can do about 2W without > heatsink (depends a lot on your package of course). The 400mW are just from the +12V, I didn't measure the current drawn from +5V. That could be another 500mW or more. >> Without a heatsink you'll burn your fingers on it. Still, it doesn't >> seem to mind. TED and the 8501 don't get as hot by a long shot but are >> still more prone to die. :( > > Would be interesting to know how it dies. You can often see it under > a microscope, hint hint hint :-) Greg James already got a dead 8501 (and some other chips) from me. We can only wait for the die shots now. > Heat alone isn't such a big deal, but it certainly can be a contributing > factor to untimely chip death. There must be something worse as well > though. I still think it's an unstable HMOS-II-process that killed the first 8xxx chips from MOS before their time. If that's the case, they got it fixed later since the 8xxx-chips with a '85 or later datecode are not as 'brittle'. Gerrit Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2011-09-04 19:00:03
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.