Hopefully the only-a-quarter-of-your-memory-being-detected was a bit of a one off, else the obvious place to inspect would be the BA lines.
BW
I think @PhilC said there was 64MB on it, so "lost" half ... Might be a iffy PLD solder... but if this current RAM passes, then at least I can carry on with other stuff...Badwolf wrote: Mon Mar 29, 2021 5:26 pm Hopefully the only-a-quarter-of-your-memory-being-detected was a bit of a one off, else the obvious place to inspect would be the BA lines.
My first board was 128... second one is 32.PhilC wrote: Mon Mar 29, 2021 5:35 pm I've only ever made two 128mb boards, one I've got and another was for a forum member. The ram price is nearly 10 times as much for 128mb.
That just means some of the AltRAM has been used already and isn't available for testing. Probably YAARTTT itself is loaded into it!exxos wrote: Mon Mar 29, 2021 8:04 pm The original TF536 actually comes out the same amount of TTRAM... Odd the start address is "out"... It seems to be passing memory test just fine..
You can choose not to run FASTRAM.PRG and instead, when running YAARTTT choose the (hidden) "M" option from the menu and type in your own address range.I tried porting my firmware over to the original board, but I just get a row of bombs as soon as FASTRAM.PRG is runSo there must be some problem with my changes somewhere even though I have not touched the TTRAM code
![]()
That is what I have been doing... RAM just fails after a few seconds... But running in STOS, assume because the loops are slower, the RAM tests just fine...Badwolf wrote: Mon Mar 29, 2021 8:24 pm You can choose not to run FASTRAM.PRG and instead, when running YAARTTT choose the (hidden) "M" option from the menu and type in your own address range.
Yep, not touched it.PhilC wrote: Mon Mar 29, 2021 8:41 pm I know I might be sitting the obvious but you do remember the ram runs at 100mhz?