> On 2022-09-04, at 19:41, Gerrit Heitsch <gerrit_at_laosinh.s.bawue.de> wrote: > >>>>>> ... but other than that? >>>>> >>>>> Unless you are talking about a 14 MHz version. >>>> No, I don't need higher clock frequencies >>>>> what's wrong with the original one then? >>>> 1) they aren't officially available[*] so one has to count on some rather dubious sources, which sell "NOS"[**] ones, and 2) its DIP "footprint" is imposing limits I'm not too happy with >>>> * - unless I am missing a reliable source with some stock and reasonable prices >>> >>> Have you tried https://www.unicornelectronics.com/index.htm >> No, I haven't yet. >>> They list the NMOS-6502 at OK prices under >>> >>> https://www.unicornelectronics.com/IC/6500.html >> Prices look OK for one or a few. Not so much for a production batch. I am not sure if BOM for a PLD capable of implementing it wouldn't be less expensive. > > Possibly... But would that also cover the illegal Opcodes correctly? From what I understand, those are side effects of the NMOS implementation. Since I remember reading some time ago that all the undocumented opcodes with their respective behaviour were analysed and understood, I assume (maybe wrongly?) that they've already been implemented. I take at least some projects need that full, low level compatibility. Gideon's come to mind first but also the mentioned Visual6502 spinoff might be very interesting.Received on 2022-09-05 11:00:06
Archive generated by hypermail 2.3.0.