Asynchronous vs synchronous counters — key difference: Does an asynchronous counter differ from a synchronous counter specifically in how its flip-flops are clocked? Choose the correct statement.

Introduction / Context:
Counter taxonomy centers on clock distribution. The distinction between synchronous and asynchronous counters informs timing, maximum frequency, and ease of decoding. This question asks you to pinpoint the primary differentiator between the two families.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Synchronous counters route one global clock to all stages.
• Asynchronous (ripple) counters propagate clock information from stage to stage.
• Flip-flop type (T, JK, D) can be used in either architecture.

Concept / Approach:
The essential difference is clocking methodology. Synchronous counters apply the clock edge simultaneously to every flip-flop, with combinational logic determining which stages toggle. Asynchronous counters rely on the previous stage’s output transition to clock the next stage, producing cascaded delays. This affects propagation timing and often dictates when decoding can safely occur without glitches.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Timing diagrams of binary up-counters show simultaneous transitions (synchronous) vs staggered transitions (asynchronous). Design notes link these to different maximum clock rates and hazard considerations.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Incorrect: The principal distinction is indeed clocking, not number base.
• True only for decimal counters / T flip-flops: Base and flip-flop choice are orthogonal to clock distribution.
• Depends on fan-out: Fan-out limits practical clock distribution but does not define the architecture.

Common Pitfalls:
Attributing differences to count direction or modulus; assuming one flip-flop family mandates one counter type.

Final Answer:
Correct