[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [N8VEM-S100:3893] Re: Possible run of S100 V3 68000/68010 CPU boards

You make a good point Dave.  My approach from now on with these 32 bit CPU’s is to work with dual board sets (as we just did with the 80386) so the CPU can run at a much higher speed for all RAM above 16M.  Unless s there was a real ground swell I would prefer to just “clean up” the current board and get a V2 version out.  


My current thinking for future CPU’s starting with a 80486, later Motorola’s and the likes,   is to move to GAL’s and utilize DRAM/SIMM’s memory boards.  This is a major undertaking for both Andrew and I in terms of time and layout efforts.  The reason we doing these V2 older boards is to start with a sound S100 bus baseline and not have to go back later.   







From: yoda [mailto:yo...@r2d2.org]
Sent: Monday, June 2, 2014 9:58 AM
To: n8vem...@googlegroups.com
Cc: mon...@vitasoft.org
Subject: Re: [N8VEM-S100:3893] Re: Possible run of S100 V3 68000/68010 CPU boards


Well I am not interested in a 68020 - why cripple a processor on a bus designed for 16 bit max.  The over the top memory stuff is crazy.  You are not going to find much software to run on the 68020 without more support hardware (need RTC, interrupts and more memory to run Linux).  The S100 is just an expensive slow I/O bus for a 68020 - would be better off making an SBC for it than trying to put it on S100.


You can gain a lot of room on the board if you would go to the PLCC version of the 68K  - readily available and use the CY7C199 RAM chips which have a smaller foot print. Having choices in master / slave config is more important.


If the direction is 68020 - I withdraw my interest - I already have plans for a 68060 SBC that would be a lot better direction.