RE: [N8VEM-S100:981] i960 / V96BMC ~BLAST timing

["John Monahan" <mon...@vitasoft.org>]

We could go with a daughter card Rob, we did one with our SMB (a far
simplier situation of course). The only reason I like the over the top is it
has a better potential to be a bus in itself with perhaps other cards joined
up later.   Width is not really an issue. Could we not have alternating
ground lines.  It's total length would potentially be less than seen on a
typical old 386 PC motherboard.  I would anticipate having something like a
74AS645 and 74AS533 to sharpen up the signals as they arrive on the daughter
board.

No I have no tools. Suggestions?

John


John Monahan Ph.D
e-mail: mon...@vitasoft.org
Text:    mon...@txt.att.net



-----Original Message-----
From: n8vem...@googlegroups.com [mailto:n8vem...@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Rob Doyle
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 5:21 PM
To: n8vem...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [N8VEM-S100:981] i960 / V96BMC ~BLAST timing

On 7/16/2012 5:12 PM, John Monahan wrote:

> Really anxious to see how you do with high capacity DRAMs/conrtroller. 
> It really would be great to have a GB capacity S-100 board since DRAM 
> SIMMS are so cheap these days.  On top of that, any RAM layout would 
> be generally applicable to any 80386 SBC type of setup since our 
> ribbon cable "over the top" connection is our choice of lines.  The 
> S-100 aspect just makes communication/storage etc. simpler.
>
> John
>

I would be concerned about the signal integrity of an "over the top"
connection operating a '386 memory speeds.

I would think that a daughter card would be a much better idea even if the
card occupied two s-100 slots.

Do you have any tools to simulate signals?

Rob.