On 2013-05-02, at 13:57, Michał Pleban wrote: >> The raster for placing them is 0.8" in the regular 64 > > On all boards, right? I probably haven't seen all possible (I don't have the KU board for example but Gerrit had in his hand and sent me the photo once) but I believe so. > I know there are several revisions of both the new > board (the mega-PLA has or has not the color RAM inside) and the old > board (different placement of SID/VIC/PLA). The VIC circuit has changed from discrete clock generating elements to 8701 but the bounding box remained. Swapped positions of SID/PLA didn't affect the ROM placement. In both "SID @ the top" and "PLA @ the top" layouts, the ROMs are placed using 0.8" raster. >> .. and 0.9" in the SX. Also on my SX boards (I am not sure if there were other revisions than 251102A) KERNAL is 28 pin (2564) while the other are regular 901225/6 with 24 pins. My guess is that for the quantities of the SX-64 CBM was able to shift at the price, it didn't pay to make a new ROM chip. > > Ah, then a separate version for the SX-64 would need to be made. > Fortunately, I split this into two small boards - one with the ROM > plugin, and one above it with the Flash/CPLD chip. Only the bottom one > is changing :-) Good. Modularity has some advantages from time to time :-) >> Don't you like the layout I did? ;-) > > I didn't see you made any? Where? We discussed it here not so long ago. The results are at: http://e4aws.silverdr.com/hard_projects/roms_replacement_wide/ -- SD! Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2013-05-02 13:01:25
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.