AVR Freaks

(1) 9.6 MHz -> Well, that's what I get for working on two customer's AVR projects at the same time.  Indeed, the other project was an ATTiny13.  I was getting those two confused.

(2) Reading that data byte works, and has nothing to do with the issue.  Yes, there's several other ways I could have skinned that cat, but, I can change that without any problems... It's how the graphs are made.  The tool https://github.com/cnlohr/pi_tpi just edits that byte of flash, sequentially incrementing it to generate the graph. https://github.com/cnlohr/pi_tpi... I am just wondering if there's some other "trick" to getting some extra umph out of the processor Is the code that I'm using to do the tests.

I am still worried about getting to 12 MHz.  It is possible we may just trash all the AVRs that can't make the 12 MHz cut, and rework new AVRs on to them, and keep going until we have enough boards.  Thankfully this project only needs 60 boards.

Clawson:  My programmer https://github.com/cnlohr/pi_tpi... read/writes to that memory in order to control the OSCCAL for a specific run on of the AVR.  My programmer can read the calibration byte, and that's how I'm getting it read. Also, on on the ATTiny10, the system automatically reads the calibration byte at boot and sets the OSCCAL.

theusch: Using CKOUT is a really good idea!  That is a good way to know FOR SURE.  Here is it running at 12 MHz on a device I calibrated for 12 MHz, so it looks like once I do user-calibration it gets super accurate.  It's just frustrating that so many units stop shy of even 11 MHz!

Also, as thusch pointed out if anyone else can do some runs, that would be awesome!  This whole batch I have seems to be exceptionally slow, though I probably have enough ones that I can goose up to 12 MHz that it'll work out.  I really wonder if the RC oscillators in the batch I have are just lame :(.

I know it's a little off topic, but @david.prentice, what other options are there for _really_ tiny micros.  Everything else ranges from slower to atrocious (Like the PIC10f200, PIC10f322 (which takes 4-clocks-per-cycle)!).  Like yeah, there is the PMS150C which can run at 16 MHz, but it still takes several more cycles to do much of anything than an AVR, i.e. my ATTiny10 could run at 9 MHz and still beat it in a foot race.  It feels like there's just no options when you want to go sot-23-6.

Size is the big constraint, but I would pay $$$ for something a little speedier for our next rev. 

Being an shared-bus controller for strips of SK6812's.  Going slower = lower framerate, have to hit minimums.

BGAs are unworkable on aluminum PCBs and other arenas where one-layer boards* are problematic**.

* = This particular design is not a one-layer aluminum PCB, but, the solution needs to be portable to that domain.

** = technically could use an ATTiny44, as it has a one-layer-friendly configuration, but overall assembly tooling costs still go up.  When your bottom line counts and you have to get your stuff made at cheap Chinese factories, there is a wee bit more thought that needs to go into this sort of thing.

Could use the other 8-pin surface mount variants DFN-like but it's still an awkward solution. 

Fingers crossed that Microchip releases tiny versions of their new UPDI processors, but as of now, it's just an unusual niche that there are depressingly few options for.

Unfortunately for me, you are correct, apparently they do not guarantee the internal oscillator to >8.1 MHz :(

This is with the Logic Pro 8.  It's USB 2.0 FS, so it's got loads of room to spare!

I would gladly.  Must be manufacturable on one layer, must be small, can't fit a SOIC.  I am unaware of any options.

That would be wonderful, except, like so many of these types of processor the actual instruction issue rate is <= 8MHz (Datasheet page 26), so, sure your clock rate might be 32 MHz, but you're never going to get your instruction issues anywhere close to that speed :(.  

I think the ATTiny10 really is the absolute fastest you can get an SOT-23-6.