exxos's Atari, Amiga & retro forum

HigashiJun wrote: 09 Jan 2023 21:35 That's quite weird as they (WRS online) say the PAK is a very stable device. Maybe it's very stable once you get it to work...

I don't know. I said it many times before, I sent it to @rubber_jonnie to try. It worked in his machines. It did not work in any of mine. I even tried the exact same motherboard revision as @rubber_jonnie and it still did not work. I tried many CPU's, ROM's, PSU's & voltages, modded motherboard and not modded, various motherboard revisions. Tried other random things but gave up in the end. But I think this was a remake which Frank did IIRC. Maybe original ones produced work better I don't know. But why it worked for @rubber_jonnie and not myself remains a mystery.

So I am sorry I cannot be any further help to you with this. But I would assume it was never intended for the STE or tested ?

Good news for the STE version of the TF536. The only con of this device is the lack of FPU (only a personal thought though).

I think after all the troubles @Badwolf had with the FPU, I don't think it is worth all the hassle. Plus the PLD is 100% full. Moving to the next size PLD will add £30 easily. Not saying I am 100% against the FPU. I just don't think it is worth the time and trouble for the amount of people who would actually buy the accelerator once it is completed.

The STE536 is HERE. I think this will be the last accelerator I will ever construct. They just take up way too much time and with so few people interested in them, and with many others doing accelerators these days, I don't think it is worth continuing any more. But if the STE536 becomes extremely popular then I may consider another revision with FPU.

Anyway did not mean to hijack your thread :)

I can't speak for any "re-made" Pak boards but (and Exxos I think you and I have already discussed this elsewhere),
I do have the original Pak 68/3 board and it's as solid as a rock here in my STacy. It did take me a while to get
it up and running but that's mostly because it wasn't fully populated when I got it and I had to fumble around (in
my usual fumbling style) to get it all together.

In addition, when I got the board the pins along the bottom that connect to the CPU socket were partially damaged.

Plus, I added Ralcool's 1.44 HD floppy mod and there was a conflict with that at first.

I know this sounds like a lot of bumps in the road but seriously, none of these were Pak board issues. I didn't have
to add pullups or change anything (although per the docs I added 3 grounds in total).

It runs almost everything I've thrown at it, software wise. Before I retired, I took my STacy to work during the summer
when it was slow (12.5 hour night shifts) and I would play with it there. Often, I would be called out of the office and I
would just leave the STacy running, sometimes for hours on end. Did that for several years and never came back to find
it crashed or locked up.

Exxos, I'm like you - it's puzzling how different your experience was. :?

Oh, from the Pak 68/3 PDF:

" The target CPU package is DIP (64pin, rectangular). For
PLCC-CPUs (STE, MSTE; 68pin, square) an adapter is
needed since the PAK expects the CPU in DIP form.
Unfortunately, this is a very problematic issue, since there are
always problems with plug-type adapters. Therefore, we do
not recommend installing the PAK in systems with PLCC-CPU."

So it would seem that it could be used with the STe and Mega STe,
but it doesn't seem like the designers themselves were confident
about it...

@exxos

So the PAK/68 remains a mystery...

Concerning the STE536, no blame at all for the FPU.

That's already great from you to invest yourself in such a project.

Darklord wrote: 09 Jan 2023 23:14 Oh, from the Pak 68/3 PDF:

" The target CPU package is DIP (64pin, rectangular). For
PLCC-CPUs (STE, MSTE; 68pin, square) an adapter is
needed since the PAK expects the CPU in DIP form.
Unfortunately, this is a very problematic issue, since there are
always problems with plug-type adapters. Therefore, we do
not recommend installing the PAK in systems with PLCC-CPU."

So it would seem that it could be used with the STe and Mega STe,
but it doesn't seem like the designers themselves were confident
about it...

I guess PLCC-DIP adapters were crap at this time, hence the warning...

Tried today with the PUPLA/2 and there was no improvement at all, so the problem lies elsewhere... :x

I will try with the standard pull-ups as soon as possible and leave a feedback in this thread.

Mine was a PAK 68/2 with a 68020 CPU. IIRC so was the one @exxos sent me to test.

Mine works just fine but I need to find it a permanent home for it. IIRC the one @exxos sent me did have some bodge wires not present on mine, so it could have been some other fault, but I could never get his to work.

Mine runs fine with an FPU @25Mhz.

@rubber_jonnie

May I ask what kind of PLCC-DIL adapter do you have in your STE ?

HigashiJun wrote: 10 Jan 2023 10:48 @rubber_jonnie

May I ask what kind of PLCC-DIL adapter do you have in your STE ?

You can ask, but my PAK (And the one I tried for exxos) was only ever in an ST or Mega, so no adapter required.

Ok, I understand.

My PAK (FPU fitted) was rock stable at 40 Mhz in my Mega ST, and there was no need for a PUPLA either.