Overview Features Instructions Performance Forum Downloads Products Reseller Contact

Welcome to the Apollo Forum

This forum is for people interested in the APOLLO CPU.
Please read the forum usage manual.
VISIT APOLLO IRC CHANNEL



All TopicsNewsPerformanceGamesDemosApolloVampireCoffinReleases
Documentation about the Vampire hardware

Chiprampage  1 2 3 

David Wright

Posts 256
31 Mar 2018 04:35


I really need an answer here. Anybody got an idea?

Two different machines, even when I boot up with a 3.1 workbnch floppy, it shows 2 mb of chip ram . Which would be great except it is not there and the system crashes on just about Ny whdload game and a few rtg programs.

Also on eitherA500 or A1000 only the 1000 has more disastrous results.


Gunnar von Boehn
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 3350
31 Mar 2018 07:06


David Wright wrote:

I really need an answer here. Anybody got an idea?

Quick question: Do you have an V500-2 or a V500-2+


Vojin Vidanovic

Posts 222
31 Mar 2018 09:18


David Wright wrote:

  It also crashes on Every whd load game, and even personal paint which never crashed before. Is it something with the latest core?

Its strange it looks so repeating, while no other V500+ user has reported similar. Thus what Gunnar asked - is it by small chance
infamous non plus model.

I am quite sure, as it happened before, next core revision and Coffin will solve the trouble, so thanks for reporting it.

If you suspect core instability so much (as you state on amiga.org) trying safe core would be best (that is x10 core). With blaster its 15 minutes job.

V500+2 10x core EXE
EXTERNAL LINK 
JIC
EXTERNAL LINK 
If that fails to solve the troubles, keep safe core and try any ordinary OS 3.x with SAGA/Picasso drivers, latest WHDLoad beta and slaves downloaded from WHDLoad website that would eliminate possibility of something in Coffin causing the WHDload instability.


David Wright

Posts 256
31 Mar 2018 14:39


It is the V2 plus.
   
    Logically working through this the only thing that stays the same is the Vampire itself. Unless it is reading external ram as too much chipram . When  I removed trap door ram in the 500 it was correct. The only ram in the 1000 is that fron 256k ram so why the extra chipram there?
   
    I even removed sd card. I did boot last night on an installation copy of workbench 3.1
    And again, 2 mb chipram.
 
  Edited to add this: took out the 256k front panel memory from the A1000 and it gives me correct chipram of around 200k. So this an the 500ís extra memory get intrepreted wrong when inserted. Of course no whd game runs on 256k but when memory is put back in , every game crashes system.
   
    Why wouldnít this reproduce on someone elses? Yeah, looking more and more like an anomaly with the core, but on two different machines?

Thanks Vojin, that is the version I am already using. x10, 2.8


Buster Gonad

Posts 3
31 Mar 2018 18:53


Hi David,

I'm using Gold 2.8 core and have the same problem.

My Amiga 500 shows 2 MB of Chip-RAM, but only have 512KB. No card inserted in the trapdoor slot.

Vampire has shown 512KB on the other cores I've used.

I have a Vampire V2+ 500.

I usually lurk around here, but thought I'd register since David wondered if he was alone having this issue. I can confirm he is not.



Roy Gillotti

Posts 169
31 Mar 2018 19:48


Buster Gonad wrote:

  Hi David,
 
  I'm using Gold 2.8 core and have the same problem.
 
  My Amiga 500 shows 2 MB of Chip-RAM, but only have 512KB. No card inserted in the trapdoor slot.
 
  Vampire has shown 512KB on the other cores I've used.
 
  I have a Vampire V2+ 500.
 
  I usually lurk around here, but thought I'd register since David wondered if he was alone having this issue. I can confirm he is not.
 
 

  Are you using the same x10 core David is using? Just trying to eliminate the possibility it may be some quirky thing with just one of the cores. I have an A2000 with a x11 2.8 core and it's reading the proper 1MB chipram. I suppose I could shove it in my A500 with and without the trapdoor expansion and see if I can duplicate it.


Buster Gonad

Posts 3
01 Apr 2018 08:50


Hi Roy,

Yes, using the X10 core; GOLD28-V500V2_x10

Was very surprised when it showed 2 MB of Chip-RAM. :)


Vojin Vidanovic

Posts 222
01 Apr 2018 23:06


Buster Gonad wrote:
 
  Was very surprised when it showed 2 MB of Chip-RAM. :)

Turned out safe one can be quirky. Does the same reprodce on x11 core on same board, if it works?



David Wright

Posts 256
02 Apr 2018 02:19


Just flashed x11 version and now works and shows correct chipram.
Thanks Vojin.


Vojin Vidanovic

Posts 222
02 Apr 2018 10:40


David Wright wrote:

Just flashed x11 version and now works and shows correct chipram.
  Thanks Vojin.

Glad problem is solved and even one safe core bug is reported.

Sure 2.9 or after safe cores will have that fixed.


Buster Gonad

Posts 3
02 Apr 2018 19:15


David Wright wrote:

Just flashed x11 version and now works and shows correct chipram.
  Thanks Vojin.

Great news! I'll do that myself. Cheers!


D020 _

Posts 5
17 Apr 2018 13:10


I´ve encountered the 2 MB Chipmem problem on my A500 REV 5 with core 2.9 EXE.



Vojin Vidanovic

Posts 222
17 Apr 2018 16:23


D020 _ wrote:

I´ve encountered the 2 MB Chipmem problem on my A500 REV 5 with core 2.9 EXE.

x10 safe core?


D020 _

Posts 5
17 Apr 2018 18:20


yes the x10 there is no x11 exe

there is also an 512MB ram expansion with clock.

But I think the expansion is turned off. It´s there only for the clock.


David Wright

Posts 256
17 Apr 2018 19:24


The expansion probably isn't the problem. Mine did the same when I put it in my A1000. Only different core fixed mine.


Vojin Vidanovic

Posts 222
17 Apr 2018 19:25


D020 _ wrote:

yes the x10 there is no x11 exe

Immediate solution is Blaster x11 v500 JIC, which does exist. Providing the Vampire board is v2+ and can handle that.

v500 2.9 x11 JIC file is in downloads section of this website
CLICK HERE 


D020 _

Posts 5
17 Apr 2018 19:35


I am a little shy to use the Blaster.

Why is there a difference other than speed anyway?



D020 _

Posts 5
17 Apr 2018 19:39


Maybe I´ll just wait for 3.0 or somone makes a exe version of 2.9.



Vojin Vidanovic

Posts 222
17 Apr 2018 20:04


D020 _ wrote:

I am a little shy to use the Blaster.

You should get used to it. There is a great guide at Apollo main website EXTERNAL LINK 
Since some boards can have stability issues with x11 core, blaster is now considered as mandatory.

D020 _ wrote:

  Why is there a difference other than speed anyway?

There shouldnt be, but only reported bug for x10 core was this chip mem thing. Seems even a safe core is not even that safe :-)




D020 _

Posts 5
17 Apr 2018 20:51


Thanks for your help!

posts 41page  1 2 3