ethan.dicks at gmail.com
Tue Jun 16 11:14:55 CDT 2009
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Eric Smith<eric at brouhaha.com> wrote:
> Ethan Dicks wrote:
>> Why wouldn't a 27C64 work? (admittedly, I don't have the data sheet
>> in front of me)...
> The fact that there is a "C" in the part number does mean that it's
> implemented using *a* CMOS process, but it does not mean that it is a
> CD4000B-compatible CMOS process. The electrical specifications are in fact
> more similar to 74HCT than CD4000B.
Fair enough. As I said, I wasn't staring at the datasheet (I have
since checked the Natl Semi 27C16 and agree with you), but I thought
it might have been possible.
Apparently not. They seem to only be good for low power consumption,
not wide-voltage use.
More information about the cctech