EEPROM Memory - Page 2 - Electronic Circuits Projects Diagrams Free

Agent 009 · 16th June 2005, 05:33 PM

So what's the difference :?

ops: :!: :!:

**Jay.slovak** · 16th June 2005, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agent 009

So what's the difference :?

ops: :!: :!:

That's VERY different! PICs frequency is simple how fast PIC works, you know that. But I2C clock is different, It is synchronising every bit on the I2C bus, and therefore it defines the transfer speed...

Someone Electro · 16th June 2005, 06:05 PM

Can it then transfer 1Mbit/s if its run at 1Mhz?
:shock:

thats about 100 KB/s and thats fast enugh for digital audio transfer.

Is it realy that fast?

**Jay.slovak** · 16th June 2005, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Someone Electro

Can it then transfer 1Mbit/s if its run at 1Mhz?
:shock:

thats about 100 KB/s and thats fast enugh for digital audio transfer.

Is it realy that fast?

Yes, if you run I2C at its max (1Mhz), it will transfer aprox. 128KB/s...

BTW: If speed is desired, you can use SPI @ 10Mhz, now that's fast!.

**Nigel Goodwin** · 16th June 2005, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Someone Electro

Can it then transfer 1Mbit/s if its run at 1Mhz?
:shock:

thats about 100 KB/s and thats fast enugh for digital audio transfer.

Is it realy that fast?

I suspect there are a number of conflicting and confusing thoughts in this thread!.

Firstly, I get the impression that the original question was asking about adding PROGRAM MEMORY to a PIC? - you can't do this for almost all PIC's, and I2C EEPROM wouldn't be suitable anyway. I2C EEPROM would only add another form of slow EEPROM data memory.

Secondly, I2C is a relatively slow system, designed for a very specific purpose (connecting IC's together on large PCB's, using just two wires on a common bus). As such, it's fairly slow and complicated (it was never designed to be fast!) - but as it's a syncronous system the speed of it is totally dependent on the speed of the master clock thats feeding the slaves - AS LONG AS THE SLAVE CAN KEEP UP!.

I2C EEPROM's are slow devices, you can read them a LOT faster than you can write them - and there are various projects available that can playback audio from an EEPROM using a PIC - but they use various clever methods to overcome the limitations. But you can't record the audio data in real time, the EEPROM is far too slow.

**Jay.slovak** · 16th June 2005, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Someone Electro

Can it then transfer 1Mbit/s if its run at 1Mhz?
:shock:

thats about 100 KB/s and thats fast enugh for digital audio transfer.

Is it realy that fast?

I suspect there are a number of conflicting and confusing thoughts in this thread!.

Firstly, I get the impression that the original question was asking about adding PROGRAM MEMORY to a PIC? - you can't do this for almost all PIC's, and I2C EEPROM wouldn't be suitable anyway. I2C EEPROM would only add another form of slow EEPROM data memory.

Secondly, I2C is a relatively slow system, designed for a very specific purpose (connecting IC's together on large PCB's, using just two wires on a common bus). As such, it's fairly slow and complicated (it was never designed to be fast!) - but as it's a syncronous system the speed of it is totally dependent on the speed of the master clock thats feeding the slaves - AS LONG AS THE SLAVE CAN KEEP UP!.

I2C EEPROM's are slow devices, you can read them a LOT faster than you can write them - and there are various projects available that can playback audio from an EEPROM using a PIC - but they use various clever methods to overcome the limitations. But you can't record the audio data in real time, the EEPROM is far too slow.

That's true Nigel, I just explained I2Cs speed and system clock relationship (there is non). And it is true that you can't use EEPROM to store audio in realtime (regardles if it is I2C, SPI or Paralel). Ofcourse one can use FRAMs (They have NO writting delays, sutable for AUDIO/VIDEO recording), but they are 3 times more expensive.

Someone Electro · 16th June 2005, 07:02 PM

I knew SPI was fast but i didnt know that I2C is that fast.

Thanks for the shocking info

on full speed you cod proboby run 100 uncompresd audio streams in real time over SPI

**Jay.slovak** · 16th June 2005, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Someone Electro

I knew SPI was fast but i didnt know that I2C is that fast.

Thanks for the shocking info

on full speed you cod proboby run 100 uncompresd audio streams in real time over SPI

No, SPI can handle only 6x Stereo 44Khz 16bit Audio streams :lol:

Someone Electro · 16th June 2005, 07:13 PM

I was thinking low qualety audio mono 11kHz,8 bit (good ebugh for speach)

**Jay.slovak** · 16th June 2005, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Someone Electro

I was thinking low qualety audio mono 11kHz,8 bit (good ebugh for speach)

OK, that works!

Agent 009 · 17th June 2005, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Someone Electro

I was thinking low qualety audio mono 11kHz,8 bit (good ebugh for speach)

I like my 44k-speech sampling rate :wink: (and that's stereo 8) )

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

16th June 2005, 05:33 PM	#16
Agent 009	So what's the difference :? ops: :!: :!: __________________ May God be with you. My Blog

16th June 2005, 06:05 PM	#18
Someone Electro	Can it then transfer 1Mbit/s if its run at 1Mhz? :shock: thats about 100 KB/s and thats fast enugh for digital audio transfer. Is it realy that fast? __________________ Il give you shocking experience.

16th June 2005, 07:02 PM	#22
Someone Electro	I knew SPI was fast but i didnt know that I2C is that fast. Thanks for the shocking info on full speed you cod proboby run 100 uncompresd audio streams in real time over SPI __________________ Il give you shocking experience.

16th June 2005, 07:13 PM	#24
Someone Electro	I was thinking low qualety audio mono 11kHz,8 bit (good ebugh for speach) __________________ Il give you shocking experience.