[time-nuts] Bye-Bye Crystals
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:
>> 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
>> 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
>> 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
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/m
> and follow the instructions there.
More information about the time-nuts