DIP packages (was Re: Help resurrect my Xerox Alto)

Brent Hilpert hilpert at cs.ubc.ca
Wed Sep 22 00:38:36 CDT 2010


On 2010 Sep 21, at 6:29 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
>  Brent Hilpert wrote:
> > Well, if you can't find a (reasonably-priced) 14-pinner, the pinout 
> patterns
> > of the 8 and 14-pin DIP versions are the same, so an 8-pin is a 
> drop-in
> > replacement for the the 14-pin.
>
> > Begs the question of why the 14-pin version was ever produced,
> > machine insertion/handling perhaps.
>
> Perhaps. Also the 14-pin DIP was probably invented and standardized 
> (TO-116) several years before the 8-pin DIP. The 14-pin DIP appears to 
> date back to 1965 or earlier. I don't have any information suggesting 
> when the 8-pin DIP appeared. Was the μA709 the first monolithic op-amp 
> offered in a DIP package? The earlier μA702 was available in a 14-pin 
> DIP by 1976, but I don't think it was offered in a DIP at its 
> introduction.

Good point. My subjective experience was that cans predominated for 
such devices into the early 70's and then 8-pin DIPs replaced them.

The 1966 Fairchild catalog shows the 709 offered in only can and 10-pin 
flat-pak, even though 14 & 16-pin DIPs are listed for other devices.

In support of your suggestion, the 1969 Motorola databook shows the 709 
offered in can, flat-pak and 14-pin DIP.
There is no mention of an 8-pin DIP package anywhere in this 1969 Moto 
book, they do show up by 1973 (another Moto book), including for the 
709 and 741.

BTW, in the 1966 catalog, Fairchild states:
    The Dual In-Line - the most significant contribution to
    microcircuit packaging in recent years - is a Fairchild concept.


> Fairchild had one part that was in a 36-pin DIP in 1969. I've never 
> seen that used for any other part.
>
> Early on (late 1960s, early-to-mid 1970s), some of the Japanese 
> semiconductor vendors such as NEC seemed to like the 42-pin DIP.





More information about the cctalk mailing list