Subject: Re: RamFast/TWGS From: CBS Date: Wed, Dec 9, 1998 9Ç58 Message-id: <366EAC3B.AE15D4AF@hotmail.com> I didn't know anyone made errors in regards to the TWGS and RamFAST. I just thought that people would like to see what it says in the manual. Supertimer wrote: > CBS wrote: > > >Notice below information appears to be ONLY for the Revision C of the > >RamFast. > > You are absolutely correct. After posting a bunch of replies > where I erroneously claimed that the info was current for > Rev D RamFAST, I saw my error in the RamFAST manual. > > Furthermore, Tony obviously does NOT have a 2B GAL > (see his web site) and yet his Rev D RamFAST works with > DMA with his TWGS. > > Sorry about the error (again)... > > >quoted from page 24 of the printed RamFASTmanual: > >" > >************************************* > >IIgs with a TWGS and a RamFAST/SCSI RevC > > > >The top one > >should be TWGS 1A and the one below it should be TWGS-2B. If this chip > >is labeled TWGS-2A you will need to contact AE to obtain a > >replacement(TWGS-2B). The RamFast/SCSI will not function in your > >computer until you get this replacement part. At the time this was > >printed, the replacement was free of charge (****SEE NOTE*****). > >************************************* > >" > >NOTE: applied engineering is gone and you can't get a replacement 2B > >chip anymore > > Several more things: I've discovered that the 2B GAL > is apparently another trap that slows down the operation > of the flawed 65C816 so that it can work with the way the > RamFAST did DMA. > > The Rev D RamFAST mostly fixed this problem except > that certain of the old flawed 65C816 chips were pushed > really close to the edge. These TWGS units would > still fail with even the Rev D RamFAST. BUT, in this > case even the 2B GAL often did not help. The 65C816 > needed to be replaced with a good 14Mhz 65C816. > > Also this generates another question: now that the 14Mhz > 65C816 no longer has the flaws that were "gotten around" > by the 2B GAL, it is very likely that with the 14Mhz unit, > even the Rev C RamFAST will NOT need the 2B GAL. > To answer this hypothesis requires Rev C RamFAST > plus TWGS users to be surveyed. > > Just think...if WDC got their act together in the first place > and had a GOOD 65C816, the TWGS would most likely > have needed NO GALs and the ZipGS would also > have gone a bit faster.