🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5150067@pollux.svale.hp.com> ryoung@pollux.svale.hp.com (Roderick Young) writes:
>Psedostatic RAMs are not truly static, because (in some cases), they can
>be "busy" refreshing while you want to access data.  Also, they tend to
>be slower than true static RAM.

That's not my understanding now. The Pseudo-statics I have seen have to be 
explicitly refreshed by pulling OE low. This fortuatly is easily done by
the microprocessor using the part. And the best thing is the long (very
long) refresh interval of 32 ms for 2048 rows. That's only 3 times a second.
>
>As for power, they do pretty well, but I wouldn't expect one to retain
>data at 2V and a few microamps.

That's true, but the tradeoff of 5V at 200 uA is good enough for me.

>
>If you're building your own project, and access time is not an issue, then
>PS RAM might be a convenient way to go (saves a DRAM controller).  However,
>for commercial applications, there's only a narrow range of uses that justifies
>the PS price (vs. dynamic).

The convenience is marked. DIP packaging, simple refresh protocol, and 4x
density over statics. If you had told me I could get 512K x 8 in a 32 pin
DIP two months ago for $27 I would have told you that that's impossible.
I find them amazing. And with the rising cost of DRAM, PSRAM is starting
to look pretty darn good.

BAJ
---
Another random extraction from the mental bit stream of...
Byron A. Jeff - PhD student operating in parallel!
Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332   Internet: byron@cc.gatech.edu