<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/cfs-file/__key/system/syndication/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>65.536KHz LF clock?  Need better RTC resolution</title><link>https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/f/nordic-q-a/12483/65-536khz-lf-clock-need-better-rtc-resolution</link><description>Hey all, 
 Wondering if we could use an external 65.536KHz LF clock, or thereabouts, instead of the 32.768KHz? We need better resolution for the RTC, but don&amp;#39;t want to turn on the 16MHz crystal... too power hungry. 
 We need to measure something (with</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>Telligent Community 13</generator><lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:00:32 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/f/nordic-q-a/12483/65-536khz-lf-clock-need-better-rtc-resolution" /><item><title>RE: 65.536KHz LF clock?  Need better RTC resolution</title><link>https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/thread/47295?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:00:32 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">137ad170-7792-4731-bb38-c0d22fbe4515:91b54ed7-3bf3-4c8e-996a-23670437376f</guid><dc:creator>FormerMember</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;The LF clock is responsible for the timing in the nRF51. It means that a faster clock will screw up the timing, and thus, BLE will not work..&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>