home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st.tech
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!ira.uka.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!stepsun.uni-kl.de!sun.rhrk.uni-kl.de!seimet
- From: seimet@rhrk.uni-kl.de (Uwe Seimet)
- Subject: Re: Upgrading the ST or TT ...
- Message-ID: <1992Jul24.101018.11039@rhrk.uni-kl.de>
- Organization: University of Kaiserslautern, Germany
- References: <l6u6oiINNcod@aludra.usc.edu>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 10:10:18 GMT
- Lines: 29
-
- baffoni@aludra.usc.edu (Juxtaposer) writes:
-
- >
- > Assuming you make a small logic board to enable pin compatibility,
- >can the '030 in the TT be replaced with the '040 without much of a major
- >hassle (ie: is it more complicated than stealing the signals from the '030
- >(and disabling it) and routing them to the '040?) As far as I know, the
- >only major difference (hardware wise) is the larger cache and the bus-snooping
- >logic (which wont make much of a difference if you don't plan on putting
- >more than one '040 in it - Hmmm maybe two...:). Can anyone think of a good
- >reason for shooting this down? Or should we all be getting out our bread
- >boards (ha! more like etched boards:) and turbocharging our TTs?
-
- Some months ago replacing the '030 by an '040 was discussed in the
- m68k-newsgroup. The result was that it's nearly impossible to do so because
- there are some major obstacles to it. Don't ask me what the problems are in
- detail because I don't know. But there was a general consensus that using an
- '040 instead of an '030 is not as easy as some may think.
-
- ***************************************
- * Uwe Seimet *
- * seimet@rhrk.uni-kl.de *
- * seimet@chemie.uni-kl.de *
- *-------------------------------------*
- * I really hate this damned machine, *
- * I wish that they would sell it. *
- * It never does that what I mean *
- * but only what I tell it. *
- ***************************************
-