7

I'm aware that 40-pins was a high-water mark for dual-inline package chips for a significant time; many CPUs of the early 1980s (8086, Z80, 6800, 6502, etc) used 40-pin packages, but no larger.

Likewise, general purpose I/O chips were frequently in 40-pin packages. Examples I can think of off-hand include Intel's 8255, the MOS 6522, and National Instruments' INS8154. The drive to offer as many pins of I/O as possible on your chip seems perfectly reasonable, given that your competitor would also be doing so.

A number of variants of the 6502 were manufactured in smaller (28-pin) packages with reduced address bus width and/or other changes. This suited the use of 650x chips in embedded devices, where a smaller chip could be more convenient. But I'm not aware of any general-purpose I/O chips that were made available in a reduced package; to my knowledge you'd still have to use a big 40-pin I/O chip alongside your little 28-pin processor.

Were there any general purpose I/O chips manufactured in a smaller DIP package than 40-pin?

  • 3
    For context, this question was prompted by an old (1970s) prototyping system that doesn't support DIP chips larger than 36-pin. – Kaz Feb 13 at 13:00
  • 3
    What is included in I/O controller chips? Does a chip like the Z80 CTC fall into this category? – UncleBod Feb 13 at 13:05
  • 1
    @UncleBod I'm looking for general-purpose programmable I/O, such that I can switch the logic level of specific (output) pins in software at will, and read the value of specific input pins too. Something with the flexibility to scan a keyboard matrix, drive an LCD display, or control other logic chips, as the designer wished. From a glance at the Z80 CTC, it could be used to do some of the above, but it's not really suited to the task; it's designed to be used as a set of counters/timers. – Kaz Feb 13 at 13:14
13

I nominate the AY-3-8912, which is a sound generator that also has eight programmable input/output pins — set them as input or output, set or get their level — in a 28-pin package. It sits between the 8910 (16 IO lines, 40-pin package) and the 8913 (no IO, just the audio, 24-pin package).

|improve this answer|||||
  • The AY-3-8912 sounds* like just the kind of chip I was thinking about, thanks. *no pun intended! – Kaz Feb 13 at 16:07
10

Of course. After all, the number of pins is related to the task at hand. No manufacturer would choose a package with more pins than necessary.

Examples of main families are:

(Excluding support chips, like priority encoder, status decoder or bus drivers)

  • Motorola 6800 family

    • MC6840 - PTM - Programmable Timer (28 pin)
    • MC6850 - ACIA - Asynchronous Communication Interface Adapter (24 pin)
    • MC6852 - SSDA - Synchronous Serial Data Adapter (24 pin)
    • MC6854 - ADLC - Advanced Data Link Controller (28 pin)
    • MC6859 - DSD - Data Security Device (DES en-/decoder) (24 pin)
    • MC6860 - 0-600 bit/s Digital Modem (24 pin)
    • MC6862 - 2400 bit/s Modulator (24 pin)
  • Intel MCS-80 family

    • 8212 - 8 bit I/O port (24 pin)
    • 8251 - UART - Programmable Communication Interface (28 Pin)
    • 8253/54 - PIT - Programmable Interval Timer (24 Pin)
    • 8259 - PIC - Programmable Interrupt Controller (28 Pin)
  • MOS 6500 family

    • 6551 - ACIA - Asynchronous Communications Interface Adapter (28 pin)

Only chips that need to handle/produce many signals, like DMA, or FDC, had multiple functions, like (R)RIOT, or those that were all about offering as many as possible (parallel) ports, were given 40-pin chips.

In addition it's important to remember that simple ports can be (and usually have been) done using basic TTL chips. After all, being TTL compatible is a main feature of early microprocessors. They come with the least amount of pins and lowest cost at the same time. For example:

  • A 74173 gives a 4 bit buffered input in DIP16
  • A 74241 does two 4 bit input ports in DIP20
  • A 74374 offers 8 bit input with buffering/edge triggered in DIP20
  • A 74273 makes an 8 bit output port in DIP20

All of them in 300 mil package, saving quite a lot on space. For a system designer it doesn't make much sense to use an more expensive higher integrated chip to get a functionality that can be achieved with standard logic as easily.

Bottom Line: It's all about function and complexity.

|improve this answer|||||
  • It's those multi-function, general purpose I/O chips that I'm interested in, the ones where designers would usually want to offer as many I/O pins as possible. (I may not have made that prominent enough in my question, and I'll be editing it accordingly. If there's a better name for the type of chip I'm trying to describe, please let me know.) – Kaz Feb 13 at 14:58
  • @Kaz Come on, then the question doesn't make sense. Why on earth should anyone want multiple functions, but without enough pins to use them? – Raffzahn Feb 13 at 15:01
  • for the same reason someone would want a 650x microprocessor, but not want it in a 40-pin package? CPUs were available in packages with reduced functionality, did the likes of a MC6820 or 6522 exist in a cut-down form? From the current answers, GI thought there was a market for the 24-pin AY-3-8912 in-between the 8910 and 8914, with a bit of general-purpose I/O, but not as much as they could fit on a 40-pin chip. – Kaz Feb 13 at 15:07
  • The 8912 isn't an inbetween, as the 8914 is basically the same 40 pin as the 8910. The 12 is simply a package reduced one for just the sound. Since there is no 20 Pin 600 mil standard size to be used, 24 would be minimum, making 4 pins NC (or a 4 bit port), while using the only slightly larger 28 pin allows a full 8 bit port. Logical choice. ... also, did you notice the 8212? – Raffzahn Feb 13 at 15:19
  • Apologies, the other answerer described the 8914 as a 24-pin package; from a Wikipedia search I think they may have meant the 8913. The Intel 8212 is the best match (imho) from the devices you've listed. A read of it has set me wondering, given how similar to a basic 8-bit latch the 8212 is, how big a market would there have been between 40-pin general-purpose I/O chips and doing it all yourself with a handfulof TTL chips. – Kaz Feb 13 at 15:34

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.