On 10/14/2016 12:52 PM, Francesco Messineo wrote: > > > I agree that the vast majority of failed chips are MTs, but my other > question is, how many MTs vs other brands were actually installed by > Commodore factories to begin with? I have 2 boards with MT4164, so 1 > failed out of 16 chips so far and 2 boards one with Fujitsu (none > failed) and one with Samsung (none failed) chips (not counting the > repairs for others, since I didn't record the good chips, only a > couple of failed MTs). > Too bad I didn't record the failures in the '80s. > Fujitsu chips (by memory) seems the second most used brand in C64s but > that's me noticing them since the epoxy is darker and shiny and they > look nicer than other brands., I've seen a few boards with Samsung > too. I have a board with Motorola RAMs, one with 3 makers mixed (Motorola, Oki, Mitsubishi), one with TI, 2 with Hitachi, one with Toshiba, Samsung, Fujitsu, Oki, Matsushita, NEC, Sharp. None of my personal systems has MT4264 in them. No, I didn't change them, they came that way. Commodore used what was cheapest at the moment. > By the way, if statistics were to be taken seriously, we should never > leave any MOS ROM into CBM equipment :) I don't if I can help it... All my 264 systems use 27C128 instead of the ROMs (which still work). Why? Replacing a mask ROM with a CMOS EPROM saves 50mA of power. 2 EPROMs = 500mW less heat. Combine with a switching regulator in a C16 or C116 instead of the 7805 and you have a system that produces a lot less heat which will hopefully prolong the life of TED and the CPU... Gerrit Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2016-10-14 12:00:02
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.