[time-nuts] Bye-Bye Crystals

Bob Bownes bownes at gmail.com
Tue Mar 14 12:50:07 EDT 2017


not to mention +/- a few hundred ppm is not a big deal.

You can always correct for it in software. ;)


On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:49 AM, jimlux <jimlux at earthlink.net> wrote:

> On 3/14/17 5:04 AM, Bob Camp wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> The cost difference between a complete oscillator package and a simple
>>> crystal is tiny.  The osc is often cheaper if you include board space or
>>> engineering time.
>>>
>>
>> Purchased in volume, the difference it the price of a crystal vs a
>> complete XO
>> is enormous. You will see at least a 10:1 cost savings on the crystal and
>> likely
>> more than that.  Simply attaching a crystal to the internal oscillator
>> inside a
>> chip is nearly zero engineering cost.  If your product is cost sensitive
>> and
>> not super tight tolerance … you go with the crystal.
>>
>>
> And that crystal business (gazillions of inexpensive 16 MHz crystals) is
> very different from making an approximately 12 MHz crystal used in a VCXO
> that will be FMed and multiplied up by 36 to make a 430 MHz transmitter,
> oh, and that matches whatever temperature compensation scheme GE used in
> 1970.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/m
> ailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>


More information about the time-nuts mailing list