[comp.dcom.modems] Questions on High speed UARTS

nee@cf_su14.Salomon.Com (Robert Nee) (11/20/90)

I have a couple of questions for all the netlanders out there
with high speed modems.  Thanks in advance.

1	I read in PC Magazine that in order to use a high speed
	modem at peak efficiency you must have the 16550 UART
	chip installed in your computer. (not an 8250 or 16450)
	Fine, but when I looked in my computer the only chip I
	could find that was even close was a 16452.  So my first
	question is "have I identified my UART?"

2	This 16452 chip is in a socket but it is not of the DIP
	variety.  I don't know what to call it except that it is
	is a square socket like the ones 80387sx fit into.  Do
	they make 16550s that fit into these square sockets.

3	If the answers to these questions we're yes.  Where would
	you (the experienced high-speed communicator) purchase
	a replacement high-speed UART.

Robert Nee

P.S. the computer is a DELL 310 if that helps anyone...

root@zswamp.fidonet.org (Geoffrey Welsh) (11/21/90)

Robert Nee (nee@cf_su14.Salomon.Com ) wrote:

 >1       I read in PC Magazine that in order to use a high speed
 >        modem at peak efficiency you must have the 16550 UART
 >        chip installed in your computer. (not an 8250 or 16450)

   The 16550 simply offers a 16-byte FIFO buffer in stead of a transmit hold 
register and receive data register. This can be importent if (a) you're using 
an XT which can't process the data quickly enough, and which loses bytes 
occasionally because of it (the 16550 stores up to 16 bytes, to be fetched 
whenever the XT gets around to it); this usually happens at 19,200 or 38,400 
bps. (b) you're using extended memory under MS-DOS on a 286; interrupts may be 
lost when a 286 switches from protected mode to real mode and the 16550 
prevents loss of characters along with it. (c) You're using a Perstor ARLL 
controller, whose long DMA cycles can prevent the CPU from fetching a byte 
from the UART before the next arrives.

   I'm sure there are more situations in which a 16550 would be helpful, but 
these are the main ones I've encountered.

   The bottom line is that the 16550 is ideal for making sure that your system 
isn't losing characters. If your system already isn't, then you will never 
notice the difference between a 16550 and whatever you replaced with it.

   I always have a hard time convincing people that throughput won't improve 
with a 16550. What it boils down to is this: the 16550 helps your CPU keep up 
with the data. If your CPU isn't keeping up with the data right now, you'd 
KNOW it.
 

--  
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
MC Hammer, n. Device used to ensure firm seating of MicroChannel boards
Try our new Bud 'C' compiler... it specializes in 'case' statements!

poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) (11/22/90)

In article <4889.274A0A5B@zswamp.fidonet.org> root@zswamp.fidonet.org (Geoffrey Welsh) writes:
>Robert Nee (nee@cf_su14.Salomon.Com ) wrote:
>
> >1       I read in PC Magazine that in order to use a high speed
> >        modem at peak efficiency you must have the 16550 UART
> >        chip installed in your computer. (not an 8250 or 16450)
>
>   The 16550 simply offers a 16-byte FIFO buffer in stead of a transmit hold 
>register and receive data register. This can be importent if (a) you're using 
>an XT which can't process the data quickly enough, and which loses bytes 
>occasionally because of it (the 16550 stores up to 16 bytes, to be fetched 
>whenever the XT gets around to it); this usually happens at 19,200 or 38,400 
>bps. (b) you're using extended memory under MS-DOS on a 286; interrupts may be 
>lost when a 286 switches from protected mode to real mode and the 16550 
>prevents loss of characters along with it. (c) You're using a Perstor ARLL 
>controller, whose long DMA cycles can prevent the CPU from fetching a byte 
>from the UART before the next arrives.
>
>   I'm sure there are more situations in which a 16550 would be helpful, but 
>these are the main ones I've encountered.
>
>   The bottom line is that the 16550 is ideal for making sure that your system 
>isn't losing characters. If your system already isn't, then you will never 
>notice the difference between a 16550 and whatever you replaced with it.
>
>   I always have a hard time convincing people that throughput won't improve 
>with a 16550. What it boils down to is this: the 16550 helps your CPU keep up 
>with the data. If your CPU isn't keeping up with the data right now, you'd 
>KNOW it.
> 
>

Also note that I heard that these "features" of the 16550 are TURNED OFF by
default at power on, and must be specifically enabled. If you don't have a
driver or comm program that can do this, you will not notice any benefit.

Russ Poffenberger               DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com
Schlumberger Technologies       UUCP:   {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen
1601 Technology Drive		CIS:	72401,276
San Jose, Ca. 95110             (408)437-5254

feustel@netcom.UUCP (David Feustel) (11/22/90)

Is the 16550 pin compatible with the 8250?
-- 
David Feustel, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, (219) 482-9631
EMAIL: netcom.uucp

john@jwt.UUCP (John Temples) (11/23/90)

In article <131@cf_su20.cf_su10.Sbi.COM> nee@cf_su14.Salomon.Com (Robert Nee) writes:
>1	I read in PC Magazine that in order to use a high speed
>	modem at peak efficiency you must have the 16550 UART
>	chip installed in your computer.

Simply installing a 16550 won't buy you a thing.  You have to have
software that can enable its FIFO mode before you will see any
improved performance.  And if you're running in a single-tasking
environment on a sufficiently fast computer, I don't think you'll see
any benefit from a 16550 anyway.

>2	This 16452 chip is in a socket but it is not of the DIP
>	variety.  I don't know what to call it except that it is
>	is a square socket like the ones 80387sx fit into.  Do
>	they make 16550s that fit into these square sockets.

My National Semiconductor data book shows part number NS16550AV as
being in a "chip carrier package" -- it's a 44-pin square part.

>3	If the answers to these questions we're yes.  Where would
>	you (the experienced high-speed communicator) purchase
>	a replacement high-speed UART.

I've bought 16550s from JDR Microdevices and Pioneer Electronics in
the past, but only in DIP packaging.  I don't know if they have the
PCC packaging as well.
-- 
John W. Temples -- john@jwt.UUCP (uunet!jwt!john)

mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) (11/26/90)

nee@cf_su14.Salomon.Com (Robert Nee) writes:
[Various questions about the 16550]
> P.S. the computer is a DELL 310 if that helps anyone...

As I recall, the Dell 310 has the serial ports built into the
motherboard -- which means it's unlikely it has anything even remotely
resembling an 8250, 16450, or 16550.  More likely than not, it's got
some sort of VLSI chip that has the UARTs, the "glue" chips, and
everything else necessary for serial and parallel ports in it.  You
aren't going to be able to replace this with a 16550, because you'd be
replacing your entire I/O subsystem, more or less.

My advice would be to stick with what you have, if it works.  If you
start losing characters at high speeds, then your only choice will be
to disable the ports on the motherboard and buy a separate I/O card
with a 16550 on it.

--
Marc Unangst               |
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us  | "Bus error: passengers dumped"
...!umich!leebai!mudos!mju | 

mark@typhoon.ucar.edu (Mark Bradford) (11/27/90)

In <6Dk8s3w163w@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us> mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) writes:

>nee@cf_su14.Salomon.Com (Robert Nee) writes:
>[Various questions about the 16550]
>> P.S. the computer is a DELL 310 if that helps anyone...

>As I recall, the Dell 310 has the serial ports built into the
>motherboard -- which means it's unlikely it has anything even remotely
>resembling an 8250, 16450, or 16550.  More likely than not, it's got
>some sort of VLSI chip that has the UARTs, the "glue" chips, and
>everything else necessary for serial and parallel ports in it.  You
>aren't going to be able to replace this with a 16550, because you'd be
>replacing your entire I/O subsystem, more or less.

As a matter of fact, I've done just this upgrade on a Dell 310.  It
turns out that the 16C452 is a combination of 2 UARTs and a parallel
port, and there >IS< a 16C552 that will replace it.  (I got mine from
Western Digital.)

Caveat emptor -- I ran the 16550.EXE program I found on a
local BBS to enable the FIFO buffers, and it claimed to work, but
Kermit and Procomm Plus didn't really seem to know what to do with it.
But just using the 16C552 instead of the 16C452 cured my dropped
character problem, even without explicitly enabling the FIFOs.

I have >heard< that Western Digital 16550As have some sort of problem
that National Semiconductor 16550s don't, which may carry over to the
16C552, but this may be just rumor.  Your mileage may vary.

-- Mark Bradford (bradfrd2@ncar.ucar.edu) <> To err is human, to moo bovine.

john@jwt.UUCP (John Temples) (11/28/90)

In article <mark.659669162@typhoon.ucar.edu> bradfrd2@ncar.ucar.edu (Mark Bradford) writes:
>I have >heard< that Western Digital 16550As have some sort of problem
>that National Semiconductor 16550s don't

I have three of the WD parts and one NS part in my Digiboard.  I have
yet to notice any anomalies from the WD chips.
-- 
John W. Temples -- john@jwt.UUCP (uunet!jwt!john)

caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Frosberg WA7KGX) (11/29/90)

In article <1990Nov28.040535.7891@jwt.UUCP> john@jwt.UUCP (John Temples) writes:
-In article <mark.659669162@typhoon.ucar.edu> bradfrd2@ncar.ucar.edu (Mark Bradford) writes:
->I have >heard< that Western Digital 16550As have some sort of problem
->that National Semiconductor 16550s don't
-
-I have three of the WD parts and one NS part in my Digiboard.  I have
-yet to notice any anomalies from the WD chips.
--- 
-John W. Temples -- john@jwt.UUCP (uunet!jwt!john)

Early WD chips have problems transmitting at slow speeds (< 4800 or so).
I haven't heard of a fix yet other than disabling the FIFO.

Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX          ...!tektronix!reed!omen!caf 
Author of YMODEM, ZMODEM, Professional-YAM, ZCOMM, and DSZ
  Omen Technology Inc    "The High Reliability Software"
17505-V NW Sauvie IS RD   Portland OR 97231   503-621-3406
TeleGodzilla:621-3746 FAX:621-3735 CIS:70007,2304 Genie:CAF