Beginning of very long journey

[rmahlert]

From Best Electronics website
http://www.best-electronics-ca.com/addendum.htm

40 pin 520ST / 1040ST / STE / Mega / MegaSTE / TT / Stacy / Falcon right angle ST Cartridge connector. CB101494 $9.95

40 pin 520ST / 1040ST / STE / Mega / MegaSTE / TT / Stacy / Falcon right angle ST Cartridge connector tested "Solder Pull". CB101494P $4.95

Best electronics IC page has the
( http://www.best-electronics-ca.com/custom-i.htm )
Videl for $45
68882 FPU $60
68LC030 CPU $25
68901FN $15
No clue how many of each.

Rob

[mpattonm]

Could an alternative connector be used allowing cartridges to be modified ?

Whats the point? All current cartridges would be useless anyway.

it the worst case, an user can reuse a connector from dead ST

Right, but I really do not want to put an effort for "the worst case". I mean few people could move them from donor boards, right. But unless there is a source for new replacements on open market, I am not going to include Atari ROM port in F030NG.

[TheNameOfTheGame]

Whats the point? All current cartridges would be useless anyway.

it the worst case, an user can reuse a connector from dead ST

Right, but I really do not want to put an effort for "the worst case". I mean few people could move them from donor boards, right. But unless there is a source for new replacements on open market, I am not going to include Atari ROM port in F030NG.

I don't understand the statement. You won't even put the ROM port footprint on the board so we can move over a donor?

[stormy]

Perhaps a custom header connection could be put on the motherboard, something that uses the same amount of data lines. Then if people want to, they could make their own cables to connect from the motherboard to the back of their 'case' or whatever they end up using. Please forgive my ignorance if this would require a lot of re-routing to the motherboard pcb.

[mpattonm]

it the worst case, an user can reuse a connector from dead ST

Right, but I really do not want to put an effort for "the worst case". I mean few people could move them from donor boards, right. But unless there is a source for new replacements on open market, I am not going to include Atari ROM port in F030NG.

I don't understand the statement. You won't even put the ROM port footprint on the board so we can move over a donor?

Exactly. I do not want to sound harsch, really, but unless someone finds same/compatible connector on open market, I will not include it. I am not willing to spend time on re-routing the board to support such a marginal case.
If you insist on a feature F030NG will not provide, get a Falcon. Or build one. Or design something that fully suits your needs, there is even Eagle library with most parts available on my GitHub for download, this is a very good head start for you.

[mpattonm]

Perhaps a custom header connection could be put on the motherboard, something that uses the same amount of data lines. Then if people want to, they could make their own cables to connect from the motherboard to the back of their 'case' or whatever they end up using. Please forgive my ignorance if this would require a lot of re-routing to the motherboard pcb.

Internal CPU port is already extended with ROM3 and ROM4 signals, so this is perfectly doable.

[TheNameOfTheGame]

Perhaps a custom header connection could be put on the motherboard, something that uses the same amount of data lines. Then if people want to, they could make their own cables to connect from the motherboard to the back of their 'case' or whatever they end up using. Please forgive my ignorance if this would require a lot of re-routing to the motherboard pcb.

Internal CPU port is already extended with ROM3 and ROM4 signals, so this is perfectly doable.

Cool, I think that would be enough for anyone needing it to add in the functionality.

[mpattonm]

I will take a look at https://www.samtec.com/products/mec2-20-01-l-dv-np if this could somehow be adapted as right-angle plugin module.

[Rustynutt]

With respect to the VIDEL, COMBEL and SDMA, are the quantities WIZZTRONICS have for sale enough to warrant utilizing those, or is work progressing on other alternatives?

From what I've read and re-read over the years of Motorola Data Sheets, progressive linage DSP's are suppose to be 100% backward compatible instruction set.

While I have purchased later IC, never attempted to retrofit as it will require an adapter due to a few pins later re-designated by MOT over the 56001 layout.

Not versed at all with emulation, the little I've read seems it's progressed significantly, but that puts additional strain on processing, or addition of an alternate method of execution. But, likey that to be more a source of incompatibility with very specific applications such as CAF than later versions of the actual DSP itself.

IMHO

[mikro]

I was in touch with Steve about those SDMA/Combel/Videl packs but it led to nowhere. He seems to believe that he can still score more than $15,000 USD on those in this life time so I let it go.

[dml]

Just some random comments/scraps from me...

Regarding the DSP - and whatever you decide to do there - the mapping of the DSP's host port onto the Falcon bus probably needs to be exactly the same (timing-wise, access-order-wise) if compatibility is to be retained. Partly because it is a significant bottleneck and partly because there are quite a few programs already depending on this bottleneck to avoid some '''unnecessary''' synchronization.

OTOH if there is a 'faster but less compatible' scenario lined up - by default or by switch/configuration - then relaxing that bottleneck somehow would be a decent bonus. We'd like to transfer more data please

With the original Falcon you could throw a small amount of data over the host port, do a lot of computation on it and then get a small amount back (assuming of course you wanted it back vs emitting as audio). Putting a more powerful DSP on there would result in an even wilder data-sent/work-done ratio.

Finally - while it has been a long time since I played with it, and I could be wrong - I'm pretty sure some of the old 68040/60 accelerators did something weird with the bus which actually made the DSP host port comms slower by a measurable degree. Probably for compatibility. But still, not great.

I think that's all I had to say on this - and very nice work BTW

[Rustynutt]

I was in touch with Steve about those SDMA/Combel/Videl packs but it led to nowhere. He seems to believe that he can still score more than $15,000 USD on those in this life time so I let it go.

Without looking at the auction, for the 3 IC groups of significance isn't the cost more around 8K?

Since he doesn't have even counts, break 3 equal packages to 70 units.
Only about $115 each a Falcon, same cost as an 68060.

[Rustynutt]

With respect to the VIDEL, COMBEL and SDMA, are the quantities WIZZTRONICS have for sale enough to warrant utilizing those, or is work progressing on other alternatives?

From what I've read and re-read over the years of Motorola Data Sheets, progressive linage DSP's are suppose to be 100% backward compatible instruction set.

While I have purchased later IC, never attempted to retrofit as it will require an adapter due to a few pins later re-designated by MOT over the 56001 layout.

Not versed at all with emulation, the little I've read seems it's progressed significantly, but that puts additional strain on processing, or addition of an alternate method of execution. But, likey that to be more a source of incompatibility with very specific applications such as CAF than later versions of the actual DSP itself.

IMHO

Many years ago we discussed a replacement DSP, you pointed out the different foot print, about as far as I'd went with trying a later versions. Bought a few, they still set. This was back looking into AB limits possibly being the MACH IC's. Too, went as far as ordering faster rated GALS and EPROM to try. Stock managed 20MHz reliably, 22MHz if not hitting the SCSI BUS for the AB. Nova had no issues, neither EXPOSE or Falcon Speed.

Don't recall issues with DSP in the AB/Nemesis.

Purchased a MOT DSP evaluation board planning to build an interface cable for the Falcon, being moderate hardware level only, would need help sending DSP process to check compatibility of the boards DSP.

[mikro]

Without looking at the auction, for the 3 IC groups of significance isn't the cost more around 8K?

It is, if you are happy with buying ~100 pieces of each for your own usage. Our idea was to buy all of his stock (he has more than listed) for a more discounted price (to cover our risk of not being able to sell them so well in the future) but he wasn't interested even for that $15k.

[Rustynutt]

Was thinking for use with this project.
Odd he's not breaking them down into per unit groups evenly like sets of 70, ect.
I have a small history with Dave, and had thought of a purchase, but not for resale, but to (buy) into the very long journey (as an offer, nothing said). Have to admit, can feel the pain if past developers, up to the critical post of the CT not provided with an 060 for the same price, as well as some asking Nature to release information on their commercial venture.
Talking with Gerhard about Photoline a few years back, a peeve he had was how the product was given away within the community.
Remember how tightly Apex Media was controlled....