carpente@tinman.cis.ohio-state.edu (matthew w carpenter) (04/11/91)
A friend of mine has an I/O card in his 386 clone that has the 82450 UART. Where does the 82450 fit into the scheme of things? I don't know if his I/O card is 8 or 16 bit, but I suspect the 82450 is an 8-bit version of the 16450 - am I right?
root@zswamp.uucp (Geoffrey Welsh) (04/12/91)
matthew w carpenter (carpente@tinman.cis.ohio-state.edu ) wrote: >A friend of mine has an I/O card in his 386 clone that has >the 82450 UART. >Where does the 82450 fit into the scheme of things? As far as I know, there's no difference from a feature point of view between the 8250 and the 16450 (and therefore the 8250). >I don't know if his I/O card is 8 or 16 bit, but I suspect >the 82450 is an 8-bit version of the 16450 - am I right? Whaoh, let's quash that one before it gets out: the 16450 is also an 8-bit I/O device. In fact, I don't know of any UARTs that are 16-bit (NOTE: I know the Amiga uses a 16-bit shift register for its serial I/O, and I haven't spent any time looking at specs of the DUART). The 16450 may be the standard in AT-class machines, but I suspect that this has more to do with bugs in the 8250 (and/or its inability to operate at higher clock speeds), so a 'fixed' 8250 - perchance an 82450? - would also be acceptable... but they're *all* 8-bit devices. -- UUCP: watmath!xenitec!zswamp!root | 602-66 Mooregate Crescent Internet: root@zswamp.fidonet.org | Kitchener, Ontario FidoNet: SYSOP, 1:221/171 | N2M 5E6 CANADA Data: (519) 742-8939 | (519) 741-9553 The mile is traversed not by a single leap, but by a procession of coherent steps; those who insist on making the trip in a single element will be failing long after you and I have discovered new worlds. -- me