T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
506.1 | Ask this guy ! | CESARE::ZABOT | Marco Zabot-Adv.Tech.mgr-Turin ACT | Mon May 25 1987 12:13 | 32 |
| From my collection! If you contact him, please post the jumpers map fro the
1MB. We'd like to do it too!.
Ciao.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: rpa 1-May-1987 1206
To: Zabot
Subj: Amiga 2000 memory questions.
Path: decwrl!pyramid!ctnews!sri-unix!sri-spam!rutgers!mit-eddie!gatech!seismo!mcvax!ukc!eagle!rpa
Organization: Computing Lab, University of Kent at Canterbury, UK.
Hi Everyone.
Excuse me, this is my first posting to the net.
Ive got an Amiga 2000, and have had it for about 3 Weeks now.
Im in the United Kingdom, and have the German built machine not the West
Chester design.
.... (omissis) ...
Anyway, on opening up my machine, i find that there is a board in the processor
slot, this contains 0.5Mbytes of ram, and a further 0.5Mbytes of empty sockets.
The main board only contains 0.5Mbytes ram.
Almost the first thing i did was to go buy 16 * 256k D-ram chips and plug them
into the empty sockets, and play about with the jumpers on the board until the
extra .5Mbytes appeared.
I found out that the ram was mapped at C00000 to CFFFFF using ROMwack and a
terminal.
.... ( omissis) ...
Richard Almeida.
|
506.2 | Jumper configuration for 1.5MB A2000 | GVAADG::DWANJA | | Mon May 25 1987 13:31 | 22 |
| Re : .0
After reading some magazines, I found out how to add the 512k :
The card is pluged in the MMU connector(86pins like the one in A1000)
which adress is always C00000.
But on the card they are five jumpers.
To signal that the card is a 512k card they must be
OFF ON ON ON OFF
To signal that the card contain a Megabyte they must be
OFF ON OFF OFF ON.
I don't know the meaning of the jumpers but it works.
This allow to extend the Amiga 2000 to 1,5 for only the price of 16 256kbit
chips. That's great...
Daniel W.
|
506.3 | I got me some chips | NWGEDU::RAIJMAKERS | You trace 'm, I make 'm | Mon Mar 06 1989 11:30 | 14 |
| Hi,
I added 16 256k chips to my mem board and configuered the jumpers
as shown in re.2 but there's a problem somewhere.
I can write to the new memory, but I can not read from it !!
(a reset when I acces it)
The chips I used have an 120nsec. acces time. Is this the problem?
What's the speed of the original chips?
Is there a way to make them work with the new ones?
Please help!
|
506.4 | 120ns is fine | TLE::RMEYERS | Randy Meyers | Mon Mar 06 1989 21:24 | 7 |
| Re: .3
> The chips I used have an 120nsec. acces time. Is this the problem?
> What's the speed of the original chips?
I don't think that that is a problem. I think chip faster than 150ns
(probably what Commodore uses) is OK.
|
506.5 | Randy, you restored my hope ! | NWGEDU::RAIJMAKERS | You trace 'm, I make 'm | Thu Mar 16 1989 09:02 | 16 |
| Thanks for the reply, Randy. It encouraged me to keep on trying.
Searching through memory I noticed several faults appearing on
a regular basis all over the new 512kb.
In order to make it work I had to 'piggybag' three extra chips.
It makes no difference where I put the extra chips, but
without them my errors return.
I don't know why this works, but it does.
Did anyone else have this same problem, or do any of
you guys have an explanation for this solution ?
Thanks for your info,
greetings from Harrie R.(the Ray-Maker)
|
506.6 | Piggy back what chips??? | HPSTEK::SENNA | | Thu Mar 16 1989 09:21 | 3 |
| Can you explain the problem and solution in more detail please?
I think being sick has corrupted my brain cells!
|
506.7 | The whole story | NWGEDU::RAIJMAKERS | You trace 'm, I make 'm | Fri Mar 17 1989 04:56 | 38 |
| I added 16 256kb mem. chips to the 1mb board, which was half filled.
Then I set the jumpers on that board so the A2000 saw 1.5mb.
The new memory adresses go from c80000 to cfffff.
So far no problem!
I could write data to that part of memory,
but reading it back gave problems.
In order to find out what was wrong I occupied the memory with zero's
(I used cmon, $ O c80000 cfffff 00).
Reading the mem. gave somethin like this:
C80000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00 00 00 b0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00 0f 00 00 00 00 00 00 aa 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00 00 00 00 00 1e 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0f 00
etc.
So there were flaws and they returned in the same patern
all over the new 0.5mb .
However, when I put an extra 256kb chip over one of the other 16
the amount of flaws decreases dramaticly. Adding 2 more gave a
perfect result. I tested it several ways, copying parts of mem.
to other parts and back, but the errors did not return.
It makes no difference on wich of the 16 new chips I put the
3 extra ones (--===----------- or -------===------ etc.) the
result is always the same.
I hope I elaborated enough on the subject, but if you still have
any questions, please ask.
Greetings, Harrie R.
|