Re: VIC-II DRAM refresh

From: Gerrit Heitsch <gerrit_at_laosinh.s.bawue.de>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 21:03:01 +0200
Message-ID: <56dd833d-e26e-0117-3830-2605cda71e78@laosinh.s.bawue.de>
On 10/15/2016 08:45 PM, Francesco Messineo wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:31 PM, Gerrit Heitsch
> <gerrit@laosinh.s.bawue.de> wrote:
>> On 10/15/2016 07:09 PM, Francesco Messineo wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Gerrit Heitsch
>>> as I said, at one point, they were making the 65245 (I have a few
>>> inside the VIC-20CR) and that is a replacement for the 74LS245. I'm
>>> not sure what process they used on these.
>>
>>
>> The '6' should indicate 'NMOS'.
>>
>>
>>> Why not keeping the good practice and make a 77S100 for example? 77257
>>> 7706 and 77258 (just a few examples) would have been good too :)
>>> I'm sure most of us have to keep a list of equivalents to avoid
>>> putting the wrong replacement
>>> (I do need it).
>>
>>
>> Here's my list:
>>
>> 7700   (see 8700)
>> 7701   (see 8701)
>> 7707   7406 or 74LS06
>> 7708   74LS257
>> 7709   74LS258
>> 7711   74LS139
>> 7712   74LS08
>> 7713   74LS04
>> 7714   74LS02
>> 7715   74LS373
>> 65245  74LS245 (found in VIC-20)
>> 8708   74LS257
>> 8712   74LS08
>> 8713   74LS04
>>
>> 8700   82S100-like mask programmable PLA. Revisions: (only on die: R1/R2)
>> 8700-001  PLA C64
>> 8700-009  PLA 8296D
>> 8700-010  PLA C16/C116/+4
>> 8700-011  PLA in 1551 module
>> 8701   Clock Generator C64/C128  Revisions: (only on die: R2)
>> 8706   Found in 364, 28pin. Revisions: R0
>>
>
> good list, I had some missing parts (I've never seen a 7715 so far) :)

I haven't seen it in person on a board either. But I have seen a 
photograph of a C64 board with it on it in place of the 74LS373. I do 
have a 7714 on a C16 board. Still works.

> I wonder what would have been the 7710 or all other missing numbers.

Probably TTLs of a kind not used in a C64 or other system we see often 
enough. MOS only made these while certain LS-TTL were hard to come by in 
1983 to maybe 1985.

  Gerrit



       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Received on 2016-10-15 20:00:02

Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.