MOTM

Wouldn't that be a more expensive processor, and a bit of a waste of bandwidth just for a 
USB port? As paul mentions, the CGX could do it's job on a much lower clockspeed were it 
not for the USB port. 
However I am not that familiar with these processors, so perhaps I am totally wrong, this 
comment about price is totally based on a gut feeling. :-)

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, Neil Bradley <nb@...> wrote:
>
> >>> * Processor is an ARM 32-bit Atmel AT91SAM7S64, running around 48Mhz.
> >> Good little proc. Why not run it at the full 60Mhz it's capable of?
> > It has to do with running the USB port at the proper speed, based on a 
> > 18.432MHz clock input. Also for what the CGX is really doing, it could run at 
> > "baseband" 18.432Mhz just dandy if the USB port was not needed.
> 
> That sucks. Not quite like the SAM9 series where you have two PLLs and can 
> hook the USB up to PLL B and the rest of the system to PLL A. ;-(
> 
> -->Neil
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
> C. Neil Bradley - KE7IXP - The one eyed man in the land of the blind is not
>                             king. He's a prisoner.
>